@techreport{LeviGoldberg2021, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Levi, Sebastian and Goldberg, Matthew}, title = {Democracy and Public Opinion Formation: How Illiberal Regimes Suppress Climate Change Concern}, doi = {10.31235/osf.io/6vk9d}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-40104}, pages = {28}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Do illiberal regimes suppress public discourse on environmental problems? We advance theory on environmental information control and test whether civil liberties have influenced the diffusion of climate change concern across 118 countries. Using a spatial model of synthetic panel data from 611,909 individuals, we find each unit change in the 7-point civil liberty index to impact climate change concern by 5 [95\% CI: ±2] percentage points in the short term, a result that is robust to unobservable confounding and consistent across thousands of plausible model specifications. We find the effect to be even stronger for affluent countries, but much smaller for low-income countries and highly educated cohorts. A spatial system of seemingly unrelated regressions suggests that news coverage and protest activities could be pathways for civil liberties to influence public opinion. Our study has implications for the merits of democratic governance of climate change and for comparative public opinion formation.}, language = {en} } @article{LeviFlachslandJakob, author = {Levi, Sebastian and Flachsland, Christian and Jakob, Michael}, title = {Political Economy Determinants of Carbon Pricing}, series = {Global Environmental Politics}, volume = {20}, journal = {Global Environmental Politics}, number = {2}, issn = {1526-3800}, doi = {10.1162/glep_a_00549}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-35698}, pages = {128 -- 156}, abstract = {Carbon pricing is widely considered a key policy instrument for achieving substantial climate change mitigation. However, implementation remains patchy and price levels vary significantly across countries and regions. In this article, we analyze the structural social, political, and economic conditions under which carbon prices have been implemented so far. We estimate a Tobit regression model to investigate variations in explicit carbon prices over 262 national and subnational jurisdictions. Our results highlight well-governed institutions and public attitudes as the most important conditions for carbon pricing and characterize fossil fuel consumption as a barrier to the implementation of carbon prices. The results suggest that governance and public attitude need to be integrated into political economy analysis. Policy makers should take regulatory capacities and public attitudes seriously when designing carbon pricing policies.}, language = {en} } @techreport{EdmondsonFlachslandausdemMooreetal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Edmondson, Duncan and Flachsland, Christian and aus dem Moore, Nils and Koch, Nicolas and Koller, Florian and Gruhl, Henri and Brehm, Johannes and Levi, Sebastian}, title = {Assessing Climate Policy Instrument Pathways: An Application to the German Light Duty Vehicle Sector}, publisher = {Kopernikus-Projekt Ariadne}, address = {Potsdam}, doi = {10.48462/opus4-4713}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-47130}, pages = {138}, language = {en} } @article{KornekFlachslandKardishetal., author = {Kornek, Ulrike and Flachsland, Christian and Kardish, Chris and Levi, Sebastian and Edenhofer, Ottmar}, title = {What is important for achieving 2 °C? UNFCCC and IPCC expert perceptions on obstacles and response options for climate change mitigation}, series = {Environmental Research Letters}, volume = {15}, journal = {Environmental Research Letters}, doi = {10.1088/1748-9326/ab6394}, pages = {1 -- 10}, abstract = {Global mitigation efforts remain insufficient to limit the global temperature increase to well below 2 °C. While a growing academic literature analyzes this problem, perceptions of which obstacles inhibit goal attainment and which responses might be most effective seem to differ widely. This makes prioritization and agreement on the way forward difficult. To inform prioritization in global climate policy and research agendas, we present quantitative data on how 917 experts from the IPCC and the UNFCCC perceive the importance of different obstacles and response options for achieving 2 °C. On average, respondents consider opposition from special interest groups the most important obstacle and technological R\&D the most important response. Our survey also finds that the majority of experts perceives a wide range of issues as important, supporting an agenda that is inclusive in terms of coverage. Average importance ratings differ between experts from the Global North and South, suggesting that balanced representation in global fora and regionally differentiated agendas are important. In particular, opposition from special interest groups is a top priority among experts from North America, Europe and Oceania. Investigating the drivers of individual importance ratings, we find little difference between experts from the IPCC and the UNFCCC, while expert's perceptions correlate with their academic training and their national scientific, regulatory, and financial contexts.}, language = {en} } @article{Levi, author = {Levi, Sebastian}, title = {Country-level conditions like prosperity, democracy, and regulatory culture predict individual climate change belief}, series = {Communications Earth\&Environment}, journal = {Communications Earth\&Environment}, number = {2, 51 (2021)}, doi = {10.1038/s43247-021-00118-6}, pages = {1 -- 10}, abstract = {Decades after the scientific community agreed on the existence of human-made climate change, substantial parts of the world's population remain unaware or unconvinced that human activity is responsible for climate change. Belief in human-made climate change continues to vary strongly within and across different countries. Here I analyse data collected by the Gallup World Poll between 2007 and 2010 on individual attitudes across 143 countries, using a random forest model, to show that country-level conditions like environmental protection, civil liberty, and economic development are highly predictive of individual climate change belief. Individual education and internet access, in contrast, are correlated to climate change awareness, but much less to belief in climate change's anthropogenic causes. I also identify non-linear pattern in which country-level circumstances relate to individual climate change belief. The local importance of most predictors varies strongly across countries, indicating that each country has its relatively unique set of correlates of climate change belief.}, language = {en} } @article{Levi, author = {Levi, Sebastian}, title = {Demokratie und NGOs machen den Unterschied: Was Menschen weltweit {\"u}ber den Klimawandel wissen}, series = {klimafakten.de}, journal = {klimafakten.de}, abstract = {In einigen Teilen der Welt weiß nur eine Minderheit vom Klimawandel - und dass er durch menschliches Handeln verursacht wird. Welche Faktoren das individuelle Bewusstsein f{\"u}r die Klimakrise beeinflussen und was Organisationen hierzulande tun k{\"o}nnen, um weltweit die Aufmerksamkeit f{\"u}r das Thema zu st{\"a}rken, beschreibt der Berliner Politikwissenschaftler Sebastian Levi in seinem Gastbeitrag}, language = {de} } @incollection{Levi, author = {Levi, Sebastian}, title = {Climate Change Communication in South Africa}, series = {Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science}, booktitle = {Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science}, doi = {10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.851}, publisher = {Hertie School}, abstract = {In South Africa, one of the world's most carbon-intense economies and a society marked by gross social inequality, climate change is not a popular topic. As of 2018, more than half of the population had never heard of climate change and only one in five South Africans believed that human activities lead to global warming. The communication of climate change in South Africa is influenced by the notorious inequality that the country still suffers decades after the apartheid regime has ended. Few South Africans are able to live a life in prosperity and security on par with life in industrialized nations, more than half of the population are considered poor, almost a third of the population are chronically unemployed, and many work for carbon-intense industries. The country's prevalent inequality and its economic dependency on coal influence the way climate change is communicated and interpreted. Environmental NGOs, journalists, and scientists frequently set communication cues on climate change. However, their messages are largely circulated in newspapers catering to an urban and educated readership and resonate less with people living in rural areas or those who rely on employment in the coal and mining sector. In South Africa, most people hear about climate change in mass media, but journalists frequently lack the resources and training necessary to investigate climate change stories or to interact with local scientists. Environmental NGOs, in contrast, provide easily comprehendible communication cues for unspecialized journalists and often share similar worldviews and demographic backgrounds with dedicated environmental reporters. However, because Black South Africans are underrepresented among environmental journalists and because many affordable local newspapers cannot afford to hire specialized reporters, climate change is covered mostly in high-quality English-language outlets to which most people have no access. Moreover, environmental NGOs are frequently accused of prioritizing abstract ecological concerns, like climate change, over the interests of the South Africans workers, a sentiment that is informed by the country's history of racial injustice. Counterintuitively, living in a coal area is associated with higher climate change awareness and belief, likely because coal companies and trade unions conduct awareness-raising programs among their workers and because many residents experience the adverse impact of coal mining and combustion firsthand.}, language = {en} } @techreport{LeviWolfFlachslandetal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Levi, Sebastian and Wolf, Ingo and Flachsland, Christian and Koch, Nicolas and Koller, Florian and Edmondson, Duncan}, title = {Klimaschutz und Verkehr: Zielerreichung nur mit unbequemen Maßnahmen m{\"o}glich. Ariadne-Analyse}, pages = {1-42}, abstract = {Die Klimaschutzziele f{\"u}r das Jahr 2030 sind im Verkehrssektor nur mit starken zus{\"a}tzlichen Treibhausgasreduktionen erreichbar. Die beschlossenen Maßnahmen k{\"o}nnen laut gegenw{\"a}rtigen Projektionen nur einen Bruchteil jener Emissionen reduzieren, welche f{\"u}r die Erreichung der Klimaschutzziele im Verkehrssektor notwendig w{\"a}ren. Um die politische Umsetzbarkeit zus{\"a}tzlicher Klimaschutzmaßnahmen zu er{\"o}rtern, analysieren wir die Emissionsminderungswirkung und die Bev{\"o}lkerungsakzeptanz von 14 m{\"o}glichen Maßnahmen, basierend auf Drittstudien und eigenen Erhebungen. Wir zeigen, dass die wirkungsst{\"a}rksten Maßnahmen tendenziell eine geringe Zustimmung in der Bev{\"o}lkerung erfahren, wobei die Lastenverteilung keinen sichtbaren Einfluss auf die Bev{\"o}lkerungsakzeptanz hat. Maßnahmen, die in der Bev{\"o}lkerung mehrheitlich unterst{\"u}tzt werden, f{\"u}hren nach gegenw{\"a}rtigen Projektionen nur zu geringen Treibhausgasreduktionen, so dass die Erreichung der Klimaziele 2030 ohne kontroverse Maßnahmen wie h{\"o}here CO2-Preise oder einer fl{\"a}chendeckenden Maut unwahrscheinlich ist. Um die Bef{\"u}rwortung von gegenw{\"a}rtig kontroversen Maßnahmen zu erh{\"o}hen, ist es notwendig, sichtbare R{\"u}ckverteilungsmechanismen zu etablieren, Maßnahmen durch gruppenspezifische Kommunikation zu begleiten und die Einf{\"u}hrung von Politikinstrumenten strategisch zu sequenzieren.}, language = {de} } @techreport{FlachslandausdemMooreMuelleretal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Flachsland, Christian and aus dem Moore, Nils and M{\"u}ller, Thorsten and Kemmerzell, J{\"o}rg and Edmondson, Duncan and G{\"o}rlach, Benjamin and Kalkuhl, Matthias and Knodt, Mich{\`e}le and Knopf, Brigitte and Levi, Sebastian and Luderer, Gunnar and Pahle, Michael}, title = {Wie die Governance der deutschen Klimapolitik gest{\"a}rkt werden kann. Ariadne-Kurzdossier.}, pages = {1-26}, abstract = {Von der Sektorkopplung bis zum Wasserstoff, von der Umsetzung des Klimaschutzgesetzes bis hin zum europ{\"a}ischen Green Deal: Um Klimaneutralit{\"a}t zu erreichen, braucht es eine koordinierte und effektive Politiksteuerung {\"u}ber einzelne Ressorts hinweg. Klimapolitik ist Querschnittsaufgabe, denn von der Stromerzeugung {\"u}ber Industrie, Geb{\"a}ude und Verkehr bis hin zur Landwirtschaft m{\"u}ssen alle Sektoren mit hohem Tempo treibhausgasneutral werden. Fachleute des vom Bundesministerium f{\"u}r Bildung und Forschung BMBF gef{\"o}rderten Kopernikus-Projekts Ariadne haben zentrale Probleme der staatlichen Steuerung deutscher Klimapolitik untersucht und L{\"o}sungsoptionen vorgelegt.}, language = {de} } @techreport{FlachslandLevi, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Flachsland, Christian and Levi, Sebastian}, title = {Das deutsche Klimaschutzgesetz: M{\"o}glichkeiten einer sektor{\"u}bergreifenden Klimagovernance. Ariadne-Hintergrund.}, pages = {1-33}, abstract = {Trotz des erheblichen Ausbaus der erneuerbaren Energien in der Vergangenheit hat Deutschland Schwierigkeiten, seine nationalen Klimaschutzziele zu erf{\"u}llen. Als Reaktion darauf hat der Deutsche Bundestag im Jahr 2019 ein nationales Klimaschutzgesetz (KSG) verabschiedet. In diesem Bericht analysieren wir die Governance der deutschen Klimapolitik vor der Verabschiedung des KSG, die wichtigsten Gestaltungselemente des KSG und das Potenzial des KSG, die Integration der deutschen Klimagovernance zu verbessern. Dabei stellen wir fest, dass die deutsche Klimagovernance vor dem KSG nur m{\"a}ßig integriert war. Mit der Einf{\"u}hrung des KSG und der dort spezifizierten Sektorziele wird Klimaschutz jedoch zu einem priorit{\"a}ren Politikziel in allen wirtschaftlichen Sektoren. Dar{\"u}ber hinaus k{\"o}nnen die im KSG beschlossenen Monitorings- und Nachsteuerungs-Bestimmungen dazu f{\"u}hren, dass sektorspezifische Maßnahmen {\"u}ber die Zeit immer besser mit den nationalen Klimaschutz-Zielen abgestimmt werden. Insgesamt f{\"o}rdert das KSG hierbei jedoch eher eine multisektorale als eine sektor{\"u}bergreifende Klimagovernance und vers{\"a}umt es dabei, die Koordinierung zwischen Sektoren und Ministerien zu st{\"a}rken.}, language = {de} } @article{Levi, author = {Levi, Sebastian}, title = {Why hate carbon taxes? Machine learning evidence on the roles of personal responsibility, trust, revenue recycling, and other factors across 23 European countries}, series = {Energy Research \& Social Science}, volume = {73}, journal = {Energy Research \& Social Science}, doi = {10.1016/j.erss.2020.101883}, abstract = {Carbon taxes are considered a key instrument for achieving deep decarbonization but are often unpopular among voters. While existing studies indicate that public opposition to carbon taxes is influenced by climate change belief and by political trust, less is known about the relevance of other factors. Moreover, it remains unclear why people oppose carbon taxes more fiercely than other climate policies. To enhance understanding of carbon tax opposition, I synthesize and categorize 28 conditions that potentially provoke public opposition to carbon taxes, assess their independent importance for predicting carbon tax opposition, and review the specific form in which they predict carbon tax opposition. This analysis draws on data from approximately 44,400 individuals from 23 European countries. It uses a random forest model, a machine learning method, to estimate independent prediction effects. The results identify the feeling of personal responsibility for trying to reduce climate change as the most important condition for predicting opposition to carbon taxes and for predicting attitudes on other climate policies. Political trust, in contrast, strongly predicts carbon tax opposition but not attitudes on other climate policies, suggesting that low political trust could explain the peculiar public aversion against carbon taxes. Recycling revenues from existing carbon prices back to households, often considered crucial for securing public support, is only associated with minor increases in the acceptance of higher carbon taxes. Finally, the results reveal that age, market liberal values, and good governance are related to carbon tax opposition in a non-monotonous pattern.}, language = {en} } @article{FlachslandLevi, author = {Flachsland, Christian and Levi, Sebastian}, title = {Germany's Federal Climate Change Act}, series = {Environmental Politics}, volume = {30}, journal = {Environmental Politics}, number = {sup1}, doi = {10.1080/09644016.2021.1980288}, pages = {118 -- 140}, abstract = {Despite significant renewable energy expansion in the past, Germany has encountered difficulties in meeting its national greenhouse gas emission targets. In response, Germany adopted the Federal Climate Change Act (CCA) in 2019. We analyze the state of climate governance in Germany before the CCA, the main design elements of the CCA, and assess the potential of the CCA to change German climate governance. Drawing on policy integration theory and 26 semi-structured interviews with senior policymakers and stakeholders, we find that German climate governance before the CCA was only moderately integrated. The sectoral emission targets legislated by the CCA make climate change mitigation a priority sector goal in non-energy sectors, and CCA provisions for monitoring, assessing and implementing policy reforms promise to enhance alignment of instruments with targets over time. Overall, the CCA advances a multi- rather than cross-sector climate governance, failing to advance coordination across sectors and ministries.}, language = {en} } @techreport{LeviWolfSommer, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Levi, Sebastian and Wolf, Ingo and Sommer, Stephan}, title = {Geographische und zeitliche Unterschiede in der Zustimmung zu Klimaschutzpolitik in Deutschland}, publisher = {Kopernikus-Projekt Ariadne}, address = {Potsdam}, pages = {35}, abstract = {Um die ambitionierten Klimaschutzziele zu erreichen, braucht Deutschland effektive Instrumente und Maßnahmen auf nationaler, bundesstaatlicher und kommunaler Ebene. Der Erfolg dieser Politik wird maßgeblich davon abh{\"a}ngen, ob es gelingt, eine breite gesellschaftliche Akzeptanz und Unterst{\"u}tzung f{\"u}r diese Maßnahmen auf den entsprechenden Ebenen zu erreichen. Die Haltung der Bev{\"o}lkerung wird jedoch in der Regel auf nationaler Ebene {\"u}ber Umfragen gemessen, die geographische Unterschiede dabei auf den subnationalen Ebenen außer Acht lassen. Im Rahmen dieser Analyse sch{\"a}tzen wir die durchschnittliche Bev{\"o}lkerungszustimmung zu 26 Klimaschutzmaßnahmen in den Sektoren W{\"a}rme, Transport und Energie auf Bundesland-, Landkreis- und kommunaler Ebene zwischen 2017 und 2021 mittels eines mehrstufigen Regressions- und Poststratifizierungsmodells. Die Sch{\"a}tzungen basieren auf zwei bundesweit repr{\"a}sentativen Panel-Umfragen, dem Sozialen Nachhaltigkeitsbarometer und dem Ariadne W{\"a}rme-\& Wohnen-Panel. Durch die Analyse werden erhebliche regionale Unterschiede in der Zustimmung von Klimaschutzmaßnahmen in der deutschen Bev{\"o}lkerung sichtbar. Die Bef{\"u}rwortung einzelner Klimaschutzmaßnahmen variiert teilweise um bis zu 60 Prozentpunkte zwischen den untersuchten geographischen Einheiten. In der Gesamtbetrachtung der r{\"a}umlichen Disparit{\"a}ten zeichnen sich bedeutsame Unterschiede zwischen Stadt- und Landbev{\"o}lkerung sowie West- und Ostdeutschland ab. Im zeitlichen Verlauf haben sich dabei die Einstellungen gegen{\"u}ber einzelnen Maßnahmen, wie beispielsweise dem Ausbau von Wind- und Solarkraftanlagen, angen{\"a}hert, w{\"a}hrend die {\"o}ffentliche Meinung zu anderen energiepolitischen Instrumenten, wie dem Kohleausstieg, im Laufe der Jahre polarisieren. Mittels einer zus{\"a}tzlich durchgef{\"u}hrten r{\"a}umlichen Panelanalyse k{\"o}nnen wir zudem zeigen, dass sich die Ver{\"a}nderungen von bestimmten Kontextfaktoren auf die Zustimmung von Klimaschutzmaßnahmen auf kommunaler Ebene auswirken. So finden wir einen positiven Zusammenhang zwischen der Bef{\"u}rwortung des Ausbaus von Wind- und Solarkraftanlagen und dem tats{\"a}chlichen Zubau an Solar- und Windkapazit{\"a}ten in diesen Regionen. Ferner wird die Haltung gegen{\"u}ber klimapolitischen Maßnahmen stark von r{\"a}umlichen Diffusionseffekten, d.h. der Ausbreitung von Einstellungen im sozialen Umfeld, bestimmt, wie der Einfluss von Meinungs{\"a}nderungen in einer Region auf deren Nachbarregionen veranschaulicht. Die in diesem Bericht und auf dem interaktiven Online-Dashboard zur Verf{\"u}gung gestellten Sch{\"a}tzungen der Zustimmung zu Klimaschutzmaßnahmen, stellen eine wichtige Informationsgrundlage f{\"u}r politische Entscheidungstr{\"a}ger:innen dar, um den gesellschaftlichen Herausforderungen bei der Umsetzung von Klimaschutzmaßnahmen effektiv zu begegnen. Alle generierten Daten sind im Online-Dashboard „Lokale Klimaschutzeinstellungen in Deutschland" unter https://hertie-school-ariadne.shinyapps.io/LocalAttitudesDashboard/ einsehbar.}, language = {de} } @techreport{EdmondsonFlachslandausdemMooreetal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Edmondson, Duncan and Flachsland, Christian and aus dem Moore, Nils and Koch, Nicolas and Koller, Florian and Gruhl, Henri and Brehm, Johannes and Levi, Sebastian}, title = {Bewertung klimapolitischer Instrumentenmix-Pfade - Eine Anwendung auf leichte Nutzfahrzeuge in Deutschland}, publisher = {Kopernikus-Projekt Ariadne}, address = {Potsdam}, pages = {156}, language = {de} } @article{CallaghanBanischDoebbelingHildebrandtetal., author = {Callaghan, Max and Banisch, Lucy and Doebbeling-Hildebrandt, Niklas and Edmondson, Duncan and Flachsland, Christian and Lamb, William F. and Levi, Sebastian and M{\"u}ller-Hansen, Finn and Posada, Eduardo and Vasudevan, Shraddha and Minx, Jan C.}, title = {Machine learning map of climate policy literature reveals disparities between scientific attention, policy density, and emissions}, series = {npj Climate Action}, volume = {4}, journal = {npj Climate Action}, publisher = {Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, issn = {2731-9814}, doi = {10.1038/s44168-024-00196-0}, abstract = {Current climate mitigation policies are not sufficient to meet the Paris temperature target, and ramping up efforts will require rapid learning from the scientific literature on climate policies. This literature is vast and widely dispersed, as well as hard to define and categorise, hampering systematic efforts to learn from it. We use a machine learning pipeline using transformer-based language models to systematically map the relevant scientific literature on climate policies at scale and in real-time. Our "living systematic map" of climate policy research features a set of 84,990 papers, and classifies each of them by policy instrument type, sector, and geography. We explore how the distribution of these papers varies across countries, and compare this to the distribution of emissions and enacted climate policies. Results suggests a potential stark under-representation of industry sector policies, as well as diverging attention between science and policy with respect to economic and regulatory instruments.}, language = {en} }