TY - CHAP A1 - Dasgupta, Purnamita A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Amezquita, Adriana Mercedes Avendano A1 - Bento, Antonio M. A1 - Caney, Simon A1 - De la Croix, David A1 - Fosu, Augustin Kwasi A1 - Jakob, Michael A1 - Saam, Marianne A1 - Shrader-Frechette, Kristin A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Weyant, John A1 - You, Liangzhi A1 - Delgado-Ramos, Gian A1 - Dorsch, Marcel J. A1 - Klenert, David A1 - Lempert, Robert A1 - Leroux, Justin A1 - Lessmann, Kai A1 - Liu, Junguo A1 - Mattauch, Linus A1 - Perrings, Charles A1 - Schwerhoff, Gregor A1 - Seyboth, Kristin A1 - Streckel, Jan T1 - Economic Growth, Human Development, and Welfare T2 - Rethinking Society for the 21st Century Report of the International Panel on Social Progress N2 - Economic Growth, Human Development, and Welfare" of the 2018 Report of the International Panel on Social Progress (IPSP). Mission of the IPSP: The International Panel on Social Progress (IPSP) will harness the competence of hundreds of experts about social issues and will deliver a report addressed to all social actors, movements, organizations, politicians and decision-makers, in order to provide them with the best expertise on questions that bear on social change. The Panel will seek consensus whenever possible but will not hide controversies and will honestly present up-to-date arguments and analyses, and debates about them, in an accessible way. The Panel will have no partisan political agenda, but will aim at restoring hope in social progress and stimulating intellectual and public debates. Different political and philosophical views may conceive of social progress in different ways, emphasizing values such as freedom, dignity, or equality. The Panel will retain full independence from political parties, governments, and organizations with a partisan agenda. While the Panel will primarily work for the dissemination of knowledge to all relevant actors in society, it will also foster research on the topics it will study and help to revive interest for research in social long-term prospective analysis Y1 - 2018 SN - 9781108399661 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108399661 SP - 139 EP - 184 PB - Cambridge University Press ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Funke, Franziska A1 - Konc, Théo A1 - Mattauch, Linus A1 - Pahle, Michael A1 - Schwarz, Antonia A1 - Sommer, Stephan T1 - Prices vs. Quantities from a Citizen’s Perspective T2 - Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers N2 - We propose a theory of public appraisal and employ it to explain divergent public opinion on similar economic policy instruments. In a survey-based policy design experiment with 13,665 respondents from seven European countries, we study how policy perceptions and support rates differ across carbon pricing designed as “carbon taxation” and “emissions trading”. While there is considerable cross-country variation in the appraisal of both instruments, the emissions trading design reduces opposition in all countries except Germany. We find that the treatment effects of instrument design on policy perceptions are substantial: carbon taxes are consistently more often perceived as increasing the state budget, harming the economy, and increasing costs of living and production. Using causal mediation analysis, we ascertain that lower opposition to emissions trading is partly due to its perception as less costly. Overall, our results suggest that the public consistently perceives taxes as a “tougher” measure, and that emissions trading appeals more to European constituencies not already supportive of climate policy. T3 - Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers - 76 Y1 - 2025 UR - https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-59502 UR - https://berlinschoolofeconomics.de/insights/discussion-papers U6 - https://doi.org/10.48462/opus4-5950 ET - No. 76 ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Arlinghaus, Johanna A1 - Konc, Théo A1 - Mattauch, Linus A1 - Sommer, Stephan T1 - The effect of framing on policy support: Experimental evidence from urban transport policies T2 - Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers N2 - Do citizens support policy instruments because they appreciate their effects or because they are convinced by their objectives? We administered a large-scale representative survey with randomised video treatments to test how different policy frames - time savings, health and environment - affect citizens' attitudes towards urban tolls in two large European metropolitan areas, Berlin-Brandenburg and Paris-Ile de France. Presenting urban tolls as a solution to air pollution increases support by up to 11.4 percentage points, presenting them as a climate change or congestion relief measure increases support by 7.1 and 6.5 percentage points, respectively. We demonstrate via a causal mediation analysis that the observed changes in policy support are mainly framing effects; changes in beliefs about policy effects play a secondary role. Thus, we uncover a new mechanism shaping public opinion on economic policies: the stated objectives of an identical policy design can shape citizens' views in distinct ways. T3 - Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers - 77 Y1 - 2025 UR - https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-59648 UR - https://berlinschoolofeconomics.de/insights/discussion-papers U6 - https://doi.org/10.48462/opus4-5964 ET - No. 77 ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Fabre, Adrien A1 - Douenne, Thomas A1 - Mattauch, Linus T1 - International Attitudes Toward Global Policies T2 - Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers N2 - We document majority support for policies entailing global redistribution and climate mitigation. Recent surveys on 40,680 respondents in 20 countries covering 72% of global carbon emissions show strong support for an effective and progressive way to combat climate change and poverty: a global carbon price funding a global basic income, called the “Global Climate Scheme” (GCS). Using complementary surveys on 8,000 respondents in the U.S., France, Germany, Spain, and the UK, we test several hypotheses that could reconcile strong stated support with a lack of salience in policy circles. A list experiment shows no evidence of social desirability bias, majorities are willing to sign a real-stake petition, and global redistribution ranks high in the prioritization of policies. Conjoint analyses reveal that a platform is more likely to be preferred if it contains the GCS or a global tax on millionaires. Universalistic attitudes are confirmed by an incentivized donation. In sum, our findings indicate that global policies are genuinely supported by a majority of the population. Public opinion is therefore not the reason that they do not prominently enter political debates. T3 - Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers - 22 Y1 - 2023 UR - https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-50240 UR - https://berlinschoolofeconomics.de/insights/bse-discussion-papers U6 - https://doi.org/10.48462/opus4-5024 ET - No. 22 ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Funke, Franziska A1 - Mattauch, Linus A1 - Douenne, Thomas A1 - Fabre, Adrien A1 - Stiglitz, Joseph E. T1 - Supporting carbon pricing when interest rates are higher T2 - Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers N2 - To accept carbon pricing, citizens desire viable alternatives to fossil-fuel based options. As inflation and higher interest rates have exacerbated access barriers for capital-intensive green substitutes, the political success of carbon pricing will be measured by how well policy design enables consumers to switch. T3 - Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers - 38 Y1 - 2024 UR - https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-53889 UR - https://berlinschoolofeconomics.de/insights/discussion-papers U6 - https://doi.org/10.48462/opus4-5388 ET - No. 38 ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Dögnitz, Lorenz A1 - Konc, Théo A1 - Mattauch, Linus T1 - The Political Economics of Green Transitions: Optimal Intertemporal Policy Response T2 - Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers N2 - Besley and Persson (2023) pioneer a political economy model of a green transition with changing preferences. Here we solve for the optimal policy intervention and find that the optimal tax on the polluting good starts high and is subsequently declining, to support the transition in preferences. We quantify the welfare loss of ignoring preference changes. T3 - Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers - 47 Y1 - 2024 UR - https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-55960 UR - https://berlinschoolofeconomics.de/insights/discussion-papers U6 - https://doi.org/10.48462/opus4-5596 ET - No. 47 ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Arlinghaus, Johanna A1 - Konc, Théo A1 - Mattauch, Linus A1 - Sommer, Stephan T1 - The effect of information framing on policy support: Experimental evidence from urban policies T2 - Jahrestagung des Vereins für Socialpolitik 2024: Upcoming Labor Market Challenges N2 - Does information influence policy support? We administer a large-scale representative survey with randomised video treatments to test how different policy frames affect citizens’ attitudes towards urban tolls in two large European metropolitan areas without tolls, Berlin-Brandenburg and Paris-Ile de France. Providing information on air pollution increases support by up to 11.4%p, information on climate change and time savings increase support by 7.1 and 6.5 %p, respectively. Treatment effects are stronger in the Paris region, where initial support is lower. We also investigate treatment effect heterogeneity across different socioeconomic characteristics as well as by prior beliefs held about the severity of environmental and traffic problems, and we find weak spillovers of our treatment on the support of other policies. Our findings imply that targeted communication of policy co-benefits can increase policy support across different population groups. Y1 - 2024 UR - https://hdl.handle.net/10419/302449 PB - ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics CY - Kiel, Hamburg ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Arlinghaus, Johanna A1 - Konc, Théo A1 - Mattauch, Linus A1 - Sommer, Stephan T1 - The effect of framing on policy support: Experimental evidence from urban transport policies N2 - Do citizens support policy instruments because they appreciate their effects or because they are convinced by their objectives? We administered a large-scale representative survey with randomised video treatments to test how different policy frames – time savings, health and environment – affect citizens’ attitudes towards urban tolls in two large European metropolitan areas, Berlin-Brandenburg and Paris-Ile de France. Presenting urban tolls as a solution to air pollution increases support by up to 11.4%p, presenting them as a climate change or congestion relief measure increases support by 7.1 and 6.5 %p, respectively. A causal mediation analysis demonstrates that the observed changes in policy support are mainly framing effects, changes in beliefs about policy effects play a secondary role. Thus, we exhibit a new effect in public opinion about economic policies: Different specified objectives for the same policy design can affect citizen’s views differently. Y1 - 2025 U6 - https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5359102 PB - SSRN ER -