Seventy percent of Indians believe that their country is a world leader in climate action—the highest endorsement across 29 advanced, upper- and lower-middle-income economies excluding China, as per the IPSOS Global Survey. On average, only 31 percent globally and 41 percent of Swedes and 38 percent of Singaporeans share this belief about their own countries. Some of this confidence could be because per capita Greenhous Gas (GHG) emissions are the lowest in India. In 2007, India had assured that it would never cross the red line of global average emissions and this commitment has been kept. IPSOS is a French multinational market research and consulting firm that does an annual survey covering 2,200 urban respondents in India and between 500 to 1,000 in other countries.
Middle-income countries more willing than advanced countries to pay higher taxes for climate action
Finance Minister Sitharaman also has reason to smile. Sixty-four percent of Indians are willing to accept higher taxes to mitigate climate change—a looming fiscal burden over the next two decades. Again, this percentage is the highest in this set of countries. India is not a stranger to taxing carbon albeit indirectly. Cumulative tax and levies on imported oil-based carbon-intensive petroleum products are at global highs at the pump. Coal, a dirty and abundantly available domestic resource, also attracts high production-based taxes and rents, which incentivises the shift to clean renewable energy. Surprisingly, middle-income countries are more willing to pay higher taxes for mitigating climate change than advanced economies. The willingness in Thailand is 48 percent, and in Indonesia, it is 42 percent versus a global average of 30 percent, with even lower levels of acceptance in the United States (25 percent), Canada (20 percent), United Kingdom (33 percent), Germany (28 percent), Australia (26 percent), France (25 percent), and the lowest in Japan at just 12 percent.
IPSOS is a French multinational market research and consulting firm that does an annual survey covering 2,200 urban respondents in India and between 500 to 1,000 in other countries.
Does demographics explain the willingness to pay for climate action?
The low willingness to pay in Japan has sometimes been linked to the dominance of seniors in the population. Other advanced economies have a similar population dynamic. Senior citizens have a lower incentive to finance long-term climate action beyond their lifetime, validating Greta Thunberg’s impassioned plea, that the interests of the young and the unborn must lead climate action. Sadly, a less benign, practical approach prevails in advanced economies—high on rhetoric but low on climate action. The recent decision of the Rishi Sunak-led Tory government in the United Kingdom (UK) to bring back dirty, coal-based generation, could be a concession to the high proportion of well-off, older Tory supporters. This, despite authoring the grand slogan, “The End of Coal”, just two years ago at COP26 in Glasgow.
Support for countries doing more themselves to mitigate carbon is higher in middle income economies than in advanced economies
Should not all countries do more themselves to deal with climate change? Respondents from middle income economies are strangely more generous versus those from advanced economies. Seventy six percent of Indians and Thais feel their country must do more. But they are topped by the pro-climate action sentiment sweeping across the non-Anglophone economies of the Americas. Mexico tops at 80 percent, followed by Columbia, Argentina, Chile, Peru, and finally Brazil at 75 percent. Across the advanced economies, support is thin with only Italy and Spain marginally above the 66 percent global average support level. In the European Union (EU), citizen support even amongst the fiscal hawks—the Netherlands and Germany—is only 51 and 55 percent respectively, less than in the US at 57 percent. One wonders whether this survey will push the EU to apportion climate responsibility better amongst member countries.
Across the advanced economies, support is thin with only Italy and Spain marginally above the 66 percent global average support level.
Economic woes increase the gap between rhetoric and climate action in advanced economies
Advanced economies, once at the forefront of climate action appear to be floundering as the global economy shudders from one crisis to another since the 2008-10 western financial crisis. The consequential global adjustments, and the voluntary erosion of an open economy, rules-based global trade, and investment framework as a strategic response to contain the in-your-face rise of China are taxing enough—no pun intended. Add to that the inflationary shocks emanating from the Ukraine crisis and the most recent setback to the 2020 “Abraham Accords” initiative in West Asia. All these point to a shrinking fiscal space in advanced economies for supporting overseas climate mitigation. Do citizens in developing countries sense this weakening commitment and are therefore gearing up to look after their own long-term interests themselves? That would be a welcome, but an out-size conclusion, from a survey of global public perception, which was not specifically targeted at this conclusion.
There is a broad push-back against top-down, government-enforced climate action
There is a discernible cross-country push-back against top-down government action enforcing climate action. The survey reports very low support, varying from 4 to 8 percent (India only 3 percent) for government-enforced climate action. At the same time, a global average of 63 percent (in India 69 percent) believe that individual actions matter strongly to mitigate climate change. Combining the two survey results, it points to a public preference for a collaborative approach—enhancing awareness, offering climate-friendly policy choices, higher levels of transparency, and participative decision-making. The best way forward appears to be productive, voluntary citizen action assisted by open government systems and high levels of decentralised decision-making.
Combining the two survey results, it points to a public preference for a collaborative approach—enhancing awareness, offering climate-friendly policy choices, higher levels of transparency, and participative decision-making.
A yes for financial incentives to adopt low energy consumption patterns but an unwillingness to change lifestyles
Expectedly, financial incentives like tax rebates to change behaviour in support of climate action has broad support across regions and countries varying from a low of 33 percent in the US to a high of 55 percent in Korea, with India at 26 percent and Thailand at 18 percent being the two outliers. Changes in lifestyles, like not having pets, elicited low support ranging from 2 to 9 percent but outsize support in India at 17 percent. Having smaller living spaces was not generally acceptable with support ranging from 1 to 7 percent and India at 4 percent. Adopting a vegan diet attracted better cross-country support ranging from 4 to 14 percent with India at an outsize 26 percent.
Feedback from India contrary to emerging policy support framework on renewable energy and material recycling
Finally, the shocker: For a countr that is going hell-for-leather to support renewable energy—only 18 percent of the respondents in India support buying more renewable electricity—the lowest. Support elsewhere ranges from a high 58 percent in Argentina to 28 percent in Canada, 27 percent in France, and 25 percent in Japan. Rebranding renewable energy as a smart, cheap, and reliable choice rather than an enforced obligation seems overdue in India. India is also at the bottom in supporting material recycling at just 7 percent versus support ranging from a high 50 percent in Colombia to 23 percent in South Korea. Prime Ministers Modi’s transformative program LiFE (Lifestyle for Environment), launched at Glasgow in 2021, remains invisible. It needs to be institutionalised and mainstreamed across state governments and local governments at home, before it is showcased abroad.
The generally higher willingness to pay in middle-income economies versus advanced economies urges deeper examination.
Global surveys with a small and largely urban/big metro sample frame are unlikely to provide the granular feedback that can inform country policy corrections. But they are useful in culling out some broad cross-country trends. They also are useful to highlight any behavioural shifts across broad country classifications. The generally higher willingness to pay in middle-income economies versus advanced economies urges deeper examination. Is it a passing trend occasioned by current geopolitical disturbances, or a deeper shift in citizen perceptions around the global responsibilities of the middle-income economies, which account for 38 percent of the global GDP and 63 percent of global emissions? If it is the latter, the Paris Agreement’s consensual approach to climate action has cleverly forged a taste for responsibility amongst the erstwhile Annex II countries of the Kyoto Agreement, which earlier shunned any such responsibility. A useful and happy development for the global collaborations and mutual trust, which is also necessary for the energy transition to net zero along differential pathways.
Sanjeev Ahluwalia is an Advisor at the Observer Research Foundation.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
PREV
