未来能源研究所-美国对环境正义的看法 American Perceptions of Environmental Justice

ClimateInsights2024American

Report24-26

AmericanPerceptionsof

EnvironmentalJustice

JaredMcDonald,BoMacInnis,andJonA.Krosnick

AbouttheAuthors

JaredMcDonaldisanassistantprofessorofPoliticalScienceand

InternationalAffairsattheUniversityofMaryWashington.Hisresearchexaminesvotingandelectoralaccountabilityinthecontextofa

polarizedpoliticalenvironment.HeearnedhisPhDinGovernmentandPoliticsattheUniversityofMaryland,CollegePark.

BoMacInnisisaneconomistwithaPhDfromtheUniversityof

CaliforniaatBerkeley.Herresearchfocusesonclimatechangeandsurveyresearchmethods.SheisalecturerintheDepartmentof

Communication,andregularlycollaborateswithDr.Krosnickonclimatechangeresearch.

JonA.KrosnickisasocialpsychologistwithaPhDfromtheUniversityofMichiganwhodoesresearchonattitudeformation,change,and

effects;psychologyofpoliticalbehavior;andsurveyresearchmethods.HeistheFredericO.GloverProfessorinHumanitiesandSocialSciencesandProfessorofCommunication,PoliticalScience,Psychology,and

SustainabilityatStanfordUniversity,wherehedirectsthePoliticalPsychologyResearchGroup.Krosnickhasauthoredtenbooksandmorethan210articlesandchapters,in

additiontoop-edessays.HeisthewinneroftheNevittSanfordAwardforhisworkinpoliticalpsychologyandtheAmericanAssociationforPublicOpinionResearchawardforhisworkonsurveyresearchmethodsandpublicopinion.HeisauniversityfellowatResourcesfortheFuture.

AboutRFF

ResourcesfortheFuture(RFF)isanindependent,nonprofitresearchinstitutionin

Washington,DC.Itsmissionistoimproveenvironmental,energy,andnaturalresourcedecisionsthroughimpartialeconomicresearchandpolicyengagement.

RFFiscommittedtobeingthemostwidelytrustedsourceofresearchinsightsandpolicysolutionsleadingtoahealthyenvironmentandathrivingeconomy.TheviewsexpressedherearethoseoftheindividualauthorsandmaydifferfromthoseofotherRFFexperts,itsofficers,oritsdirectors.

i

ClimateInsights2024|AmericanPerceptionsofEnvironmentalJustice

AbouttheProject

Since1997,StanfordUniversityProfessorJonA.KrosnickhasexploredAmerican

publicopinionontheseissuesthroughaseriesofrigorousnationalsurveysofrandomsamplesofAmericanadults,oftenincollaborationwithRFF.Thislatestreportisthethirdinthe2024ClimateInsightsreportseriesbyresearchersatStanfordUniversityandRFFexaminingAmericanpublicopinionononissuesrelatedtoclimatechange.

Forthe2024iterationoftheClimateInsightssurvey,1,000AmericanadultswereinterviewedbetweenOctober16,2023andFebruary23,2024.

ThisClimateInsightsreportfocusesonAmericans’viewsofenvironmentaljustice.

PreviousreportsaddressedAmericans’opinionsaboutclimatechange,climatepolicy,andlevelsofpartisanagreementanddisagreement.Thisseriesisaccompaniedbyaninteractivedatatool,whichcanbeusedtoviewspecificdatafromthesurvey.Pleasevisit

/climateinsights

or

https://climatepublicopinion.stanford.

edu/

formoreinformationandtoaccessthedatatool,reportseries,andmore.

Note:Whenthisresearchprogrambeganin1997,“globalwarming”wasthetermin

commonparlance.Thattermwasusedthroughoutthesurveysoverthedecadesandwasalwaysdefinedforrespondentssoitwasproperlyunderstood.Theterm“climatechange”hasriseninpopularity,sobothtermsareusedinthisreportinterchangeably.Whendescribingsurveyquestionwordingsandresults,theterm“globalwarming”isused,tomatchthetermreferencedduringinterviews.Empiricalstudieshaveshownthatsurveyrespondentsinterprettheterms“globalwarming”and“climatechange”tohaveequivalentmeanings(VillarandKrosnick2011).

Acknowledgments

TheauthorsandcontributorsthankAngeliqueUglow(ReconMR)andRossvanderLinde(Mappica).Inaddition,theauthorsthankresearchersandstaffatRFF:KevinRennert,BillyPizer,SuzanneRusso,AnnieMcDarris,DonniePeterson,SaraKangas,andKristinaGawrgy.

FundingforthissurveywasprovidedbyStanfordUniversity(theWoodsInstitutefortheEnvironment,thePrecourtInstituteforEnergy,andtheDoerrSchoolof

Sustainability),RFF,andReconMR.

ii

StanfordUniversityandResourcesfortheFuture

SharingOurWork

OurworkisavailableforsharingandadaptationunderanAttribution-

NonCommercial-NoDerivatives4.0International(CCBY-NC-ND4.0)license.Youcancopyandredistributeourmaterialinanymediumorformat;youmustgive

appropriatecredit,providealinktothelicense,andindicateifchangesweremade,andyoumaynotapplyadditionalrestrictions.Youmaydosoinanyreasonable

manner,butnotinanywaythatsuggeststhelicensorendorsesyouoryouruse.

Youmaynotusethematerialforcommercialpurposes.Ifyouremix,transform,orbuilduponthematerial,youmaynotdistributethemodifiedmaterial.Formoreinformation,visit

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

.

Useofanymaterialinthispublicationshouldbecreditedtothefollowing:McDonald,Jared,BoMacInnis,andJonA.Krosnick.2024.ClimateInsights2024:American

PerceptionsofEnvironmentalJustice.Washington,DC:ResourcesfortheFuture.

Thedataincludedinthisreportcomesfromsourceswithvaryingsharingpolicies.

Pleasecheckthereferencesformoreinformation,andemail

krosnick@

withanyquestions.

iii

ClimateInsights2024|AmericanPerceptionsofEnvironmentalJustice

Contents

Introduction1

PerceivedVulnerability3

SupportforTargetedAid4

InfluencesofIncomeandPoliticalPartyAffiliation7

SupportforAidAmongHomeownersandRenters10

UnderstandingDriversofEnvironmentalJusticeAttitudes11

Conclusion17

References18

Appendix20

iv

StanfordUniversityandResourcesfortheFuture

Introduction

Scholarshaveshownthatlow-incomecommunitiesandcommunitiesofcolorsufferworseoutcomesthanaffluentandwhitercommunitiesinthedomainsofhousing

(Grinstein-Weissetal.,2020),policing(Davisetal.,2018;Glaser2014),healthcare

(WorldHealthOrganization,2018),andeducation(Brown,2010;Noltemeyeretal.,

2012).Yetformanyyears,issuesrelatedtotheenvironmentandclimatechangewereviewedasdistinctfromthoserelatedtojusticeandfairness.Peoplewhoengagedinenvironmentalismwereperceivedasworkingona“richperson’sproblem,”andthis

perceptionwasespeciallystrongamongpoorerindividuals(Laidley,2013;Latkinetal.,2021).

However,morerecently,scholarsandcommunitymembershaveincreasinglyviewedtheissueofclimatechangethroughtheprismofjusticeandfairness.Thisrealizationabouttheinequitableeffectsofclimatechangeisthefoundationoftheenvironmentaljusticemovement,whichhasexistedsincethe1960s,toaddresstheunfairexposureofpeopleinlower-incomecommunitiesandcommunitiesofcolortotheharmsof

pollutionandthegeneraldegradationofthenaturalenvironment(Schlosberg,2007).Thefirstgenerationofenvironmentaljusticescholarshipinthe1980sand1990s

focusedonthelocationoftoxicwastenearlow-incomecommunitiesandcommunitiesofcolor(Bullard,1990;ChavisandLee,1987).Morerecently,thefieldhasexpandedtorecognizeclimatechangeashavingimportantandunequaleffectsonsomesegmentsofsociety(Vanderheiden,2016).

Asnaturaldisastersandinstancesofextremeheatresultinpropertydamage,

displacement,hospitalizations,andevendeath,expertsnotethatmanyofthenegativeconsequencesofclimatechangearebornedisproportionatelybypeoplewithfewer

resources—individualswhooftenaremembersoflower-incomecommunitiesorcommunitiesofcolor(Mohaietal.,2009).

Environmentalinjusticeasitrelatestoclimatechangemaystemfromthreesourcesofinequality.First,poorerandminoritygroupsmayliveinplacesthatputthem

atincreasedriskforparticularclimate-relatedevents.Forexample,incities,the

abundanceofconcreteandscarcityoftreesinimpoverishedneighborhoodscreate“urbanheatislands,”whichleadlower-incomepeopleorpeopleofcolortoexperiencehighertemperaturesthancommunitieswithmorehigh-incomeorwhitepeopleinthesamecity(Harlanetal.,2006).

Second,economicallydisadvantagedAmericansmaybelessresilienttotheeffects

ofclimatechange.Theyhavefewerresourcestopreparefor,respondto,andrecoverfromheatandextremeweather.Thesefactorsmakethemespeciallyvulnerableinthefuture,asclimatechangeincreasesthefrequencyandseverityofextremeweatherandwildfires(EnvironmentalProtectionAgency,2022).

1

ClimateInsights2024|AmericanPerceptionsofEnvironmentalJustice

Increasedriskandlowerresiliencymaybeaddressedthrougheffectivegovernmentpolicies,whichbringsustothethirdsourceofinequality:differentialgovernment

responsiveness.Althoughlocal,state,andfederalgovernmentsmaybeabletohelplower-incomecommunitiesandcommunitiesofcolorinvestinmitigationefforts,

manyexpertshavefoundthatgovernmenthasdonemoretohelpaffluentandwhitercommunitiesprepareforandrecoverfromclimatechange-relatedweatherevents.

Policiesthatareintendedtohelpallpeoplerecoverafteradisastermayinadvertentlyexacerbateissuesofinequality,helpingwealthierandwhiterhomeownersmorethanlower-incomepeopleandpeopleofcolor.

ExtensiveliteraturehasshownthatBlackandHispanicAmericans,byvirtueoftheir

personalexperienceswithenvironmentaldeprivation,havebeenmoreconcerned

aboutissuesoftheenvironmentthanwhiteAmericans(Jones,1998,2002;JonesandCarter,1994;JonesandRainey,2006;Mohai,2003;Taylor,1989).Althoughmuchofthisresearchhasfocusedontheimmediatelocalenvironment,beingpersonallyexposed

tothenegativeconsequencesofclimatechangecouldcreatesimilarpatternsinpublicopinion,especiallyasextremeweathereventsassociatedwithclimatechangehave

directandlocalimpacts.

Inlightofthemultitudeofclimatechange-relatedproblemsfacinglower-income

peopleandpeopleofcolorintheUnitedStates,andgiventhesolutionsproposedbypolicyadvocates,weexploredanumberofquestionsrelatedtoenvironmentaljusticewiththe2024ClimateInsightsSurvey.Wewondered:dopoorerpeopleorricherpeopleviewclimatechangeasagreaterthreattothempersonally?Arepeopleofcolorawareoftheirincreasedvulnerabilitytothenegativeeffectsofclimatechange?Giventhe

disproportionaterisksfacedbyandthelowerresiliencyoflower-incomecommunities,dopeopleintheUnitedStatesviewclimatechangeasmorelikelytohurtpoorer

peoplethanricherpeople?Finally,dopeoplesupportgovernmentpoliciesintendedtoaddressenvironmentalinjusticesintheUnitedStates,andwhatfactorspredictthatsupport?

2

StanfordUniversityandResourcesfortheFuture

PerceivedVulnerability

Inthe2024ClimateInsightsSurvey,about30

percentofallAmericansbelievethatglobalwarmingwillhurtthem“agreatdeal”or“alot,”regardless

oftheirincome.Likewise,25percentofpeople

30%

earning$100,000ormoreayearand32percentofpeopleearninglessthan$50,000believethatglobalwarmingwillnothurtthematall(Figure1).Thus,

25%

20%

perceivedpersonalvulnerabilitydoesnotappeartovarynotablywithincome.

Wefoundsurprisingresultsregardingperceptionsofpersonalvulnerabilitybyracialandethnicity

15%

10%

categories(Figure2).Hispanics,whoaremorelikelytoliveinareaspronetoextremeweathereventsandaremorelikelytoholdjobsrequiringthemtoworkoutside,donotperceivethemselvestobeespeciallythreatenedbyachangingclimate(Crimminsetal.,2016).16percentbelievethatglobalwarmingwill

hurtthem“agreatdeal,”comparedto17percentofnon-Hispanicwhites.Thatsaid,therewasevidencethatBlackpeoplefeelmorevulnerabletotheeffectsofglobalwarming:27percentbelievethatfuture

warmingwillhurtthemagreatdeal.

Figure1.PercentofAmericanswho

5%

0%

thinkthatglobalwarmingwillhurtthempersonally(byincome)

Notatall

little

Agreatdeal

Alot

A

Amoderateamount

Under$50,000.$50,000–$99,999.$100,000+

Figure2.PercentofAmericanswhothinkthatglobalwarmingwillhurtthempersonally(byrace/ethnicity)

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

Agreatdeal

Alot

Amoderateamount

●Non-HispanicBlack

AlittleNotatall

●Hispanic

Non-HispanicWhite

3

ClimateInsights2024|AmericanPerceptionsofEnvironmentalJustice

SupportforTargetedAid

Althoughtheeffectsofglobalwarmingwilllikelybefeltmorebypeoplewithfewer

resources,notallAmericanssharethatview(Figure3).Only52percentofAmericansbelievethatpoorerpeoplearemorevulnerablethanricherpeopletotheeffectsof

globalwarming.Whereas42percentofAmericansbelievethatglobalwarmingwill

affectpeopleatdifferentincomelevelsthesameamount,afewAmericansbelievethatricherpeoplewillbehurtmorebyglobalwarmingthanpoorerpeople(5percent).

Thesurveyexploredperceptionsofenvironmentalinjusticeandsupportforpoliciestoaddressinequalitiesinlightofexpertviewsofthedisparateeffectsofclimate

change.Afterbeinginformedthatmanyscientistsbelievethatclimateeventswill

disproportionatelyhurtlower-incomepeople,whoalsohavelessmoneytorecover

fromextremeweatherevents,Americansareoverwhelminglysupportiveofeffortsby

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Figure3.PercentofAmericanswhothinkthatglobalwarmingwillhurtpoorerpeopleinAmericadifferentlythan/similarlytoricherpeople

Hurtpoorerand

Hurtricherpeople

richerpeopleabout

morethanricher

Hurtpoorerpeople

thesame

people

people

morethanpoorer

80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%0%

Figure4.PercentofAmericanswhothinkthegovernmentshouldorshouldnotprovidemorehelptopoorerpeopletodealwithclimate-relateddisasters,givensupplementaryinformation

ShouldShouldnot

4

StanfordUniversityandResourcesfortheFuture

Figure5.PercentofAmericanswhothinkthegovernmentshouldorshouldnotpayforsomeofthecostofpurchasingwildfire/hurricaneinsuranceforpoorerhomeownersandrenters

A.HomeownersB.Renters

60%

40%

20%

0%

ShouldShouldnot

60%

40%

20%

0%

ShouldShouldnot

thegovernmenttotargetaidtopeoplemostinneed(Figure4).Fully85percentfavorsuchmeasures,

whileonly14percentopposethem.

Withregardtospecificpoliciesthatlocal,state,

andfederalgovernmentscanimplementtomake

vulnerablepopulationsmoreresilienttoclimate

change,weaskedabouttwotypesofinsurance:

(1)standardhomeowners’insurance,whichcoversdamagefromhurricanesandwildfires,and(2)

specializedinsurancepoliciesdesignedtocover

damagefromfloods.Abouttwo-thirdsofAmericansfavortargetedaidintheformofsubsidiestohelp

poorerhomeownersandrenterspurchaseinsurancetoprotectagainstwildfireorhurricanedamage.68percentofAmericansfavorwildfireandhurricane

insurancesubsidiesforpoorerhomeowners(Figure5a),whereas66percentfavorsimilarinsuranceforpoorerrenters(Figure5b).

Similarly,manyAmericansfavorgovernment

policiestoassistpoorerhomeownersandrentersinbuyingfloodinsurance.Byroughlya2-to-1margin,Americanswantthegovernmenttoprovidesuchaid,withthestatusoftheaidrecipient(homeownervs.renter)notinfluencingpolicysupport.68percent

ofAmericansfavorfloodinsuranceassistanceforhomeowners,and65percentfavoritforrenters(Figures6aand6b).

Finally,weexaminedattitudestowardthefederalgovernmentpurchasinghomesfrompeoplewho

Figure6.PercentofAmericanswhothinkthegovernmentshouldorshouldnotpayforsomeofthecostoffloodinsuranceforpoorerhomeownersandrenters

A.HomeownersB.Renters

60%

40%

20%

0%

ShouldShouldnot

60%

40%

20%

0%

ShouldShouldnot

5

ClimateInsights2024|AmericanPerceptionsofEnvironmentalJustice

wanttomoveoutofareaspronetowildfires,floods,andhurricanes.Althoughmany

Americansliveinsuchareas,notallAmericanscanmustertheresourcesnecessary

topurchasepropertyinsaferareasanduproottheirlives.AstheFederalEmergency

ManagementAgency(FEMA)updatesmapsoffloodplains,someAmericansfindtheirhomesarenotonlyatriskbuthavedepreciatedgreatlyinvalue,makingitdifficulttoaffordhousinginsaferareas.Despitethesehurdles,Americansarefarlessfavorable

towardassistancepoliciesinthisarenathanothersweexamined(Figure7).48percentofAmericansfavorthegovernmentbuyingthehomesofpoorerpeoplewhowantto

movetosaferareas–asubstantialnumber,butnotamajority.

Figure7.PercentofAmericanswhothinkthegovernmentshouldor

shouldnotbuythehomesofpoorerpeoplewhowanttomovetoliveinsaferareas

50%

45%

40%

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

Should

Shouldnot

6

StanfordUniversityandResourcesfortheFuture

TheInfluencesofIncomeandPoliticalPartyAffiliation

Inthissection,weexplorewhetherattitudestowardFigure8.PercentofAmericanswhothink

environmentaljusticepoliciesdifferbasedonincomeglobalwarmingwillhurtlow-incomepeople

ortheirpoliticalpartyaffiliations.inAmericamorethan/lessthan/thesame

asricherpeople(byincomeandparty

Becauselower-incomeindividualsstandmoretoaffiliation)

gainfromtargetedpoliciesintendedtohelptheseAmericanscopewithclimate-relateddisasters,we

mightexpectthatrecognitionoftheproblemand60%

supportforaddressingitwouldbehigheramonglower-incomeindividuals.

40%

20%

However,individualswithlowerincomesarelesslikelytoperceivethatclimatechangewilldisproportionately

incomeAmericansbelievethatclimatechangewill0%

hurtpoorerpeople(Figure8).ThishelpscontextualizetheresultsinFigure1,whichshowsthatfewlower-

personallyharmthem.ThesetwofindingsshowHurtpoorerHurtpoorerHurtricher

thatpoorerAmericansdon’tperceivethemselvestolirillel

personallybemorevulnerable.peopleabpeople

Largerdifferencesemergedalongpartisanlines.70FamilyIncome:Under$50,000$50,000–$99,999$100,000+

percentofDemocratsbelievethatclimatechangePartyAffiliation:DemocratsoRepublicansoIndependents

willdisproportionatelyhurtlower-incomepeople,

comparedtoonly33percentofRepublicansand48Figure9.PercentofAmericanswhothink

percentofIndependents.thegovernmentshouldorshouldnot

providemorehelptopoorerpeopleto

Priortoaskingrespondentsabouttheirviewsofdealwithclimate-relateddisasters,given

specificpolicies,respondentswereinformedthatsupplementaryinformation(byincomeand

scientistsbelievethatfloods,wildfires,andhurricanespartyaffiliation)

willhurtpoorerpeoplemorethanricherpeople,and

thatpoorerpeoplehavefewerresourcestorecover.100%

Afterbeinginformedoftheseexpertviews,support

forgovernmenteffortstoaddressenvironmental80%

injusticesishigh,thoughsignificantdividesalong

economicandpoliticallinesappeared(Figure9).60%

85percentofAmericansbelievethatthegovernment

shouldprovidehelptopoorerpeopletorecover40%

fromextremeweathereventscausedbyglobal

warming(Figure4).89percentofpeoplemakingless20%

than$50,000aresupportive.Supportdropsseven

percentagepointsto82percentamongpeoplemaking0%

$100,000ormore.Thepartisandivideislarger,withShouldShouldnot

nearlyunanimous(97percent)supportfortargeted

governmentaidamongDemocrats,74percentamongFamilyIncome:Under$50,000e$50,000–$99,999o$100,000+

Republicans,and83percentamongIndependents.PartyAffiliation:DemocratsoRepublicansoIndependents

s、ClimateInsights2024|AmericanPerceptionsofEnvironmentalJustice7

60%

40%

20%

0%

Figure10.PercentofAmericanswhothinkthegovernmentshouldorshouldnotpayforsomeofthecostofpurchasingwildfire/hurricaneinsuranceforpoorerhomeownersandrenters(byincomeandpartyaffiliation)

80%

A.HomeownersB.Renters

Should

Shouldnot

FamilyIncome:

Under$50,000

$50,000–$99,999●$100,000+

Similarpatternsappearedinopinionsabout

governmentsubsidiestoprovidewildfire/hurricane

andfloodinsuranceforrentersandhomeowners.

Dividesappearedaccordingtoeconomicclassand

partisanship,withthedifferencesespeciallylarge

betweenDemocratsandRepublicans.68percentof

allAmericansfavorthegovernmentpayingatleast

someofthecosttoinsurehomesagainstwildfire

andhurricanedamageforlower-incomeindividuals

(Figure5).Supportishigheramongfamiliesearninglessthan$50,000ayear(75percentsupportfor

assistancetohomeowners,and73percentsupport

forassistancetorenters)andamongDemocrats(86percentsupportforassistancetohomeowners,and78

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Should

Shouldnot

PartyAffiliation:DemocratsRepublicansIndependents

percentsupportforassistancetorenters).Supportisloweramongfamiliesearningmorethan$100,000(60percentsupportforassistancetohomeowners,and58percentsupportforassistancetorenters)andamongRepublicans(54percentsupportforassistanceto

homeownersand52percentsupportforassistancetorenters)(Figures10aand10b).

AmajorityofAmericansfavortargetedgovernment

assistanceforfloodinsurance(66percent),buta

substantialdivideexistsalongpartisanlines(Figure

11).Democratsoverwhelminglyfavorassistance(83

percent),whereasRepublicansaremoreevenlydivided(49percentfavor).Althoughasimilardivideexists

Figure11.PercentofAmericanswhothinkthegovernmentshouldorshouldnotpayforsomeofthecostofpurchasingfloodinsuranceforpoorerhomeownersandrenters(byincomeandpartyaffiliation)

A.HomeownersB.Renters

80%80%

60%60%

40%40%

20%20%

0%0%

ShouldShouldnotShouldShouldnot

FamilyIncome:Under$50,000$50,000–$99,999$100,000+PartyAffiliation:DemocratsRepublicansIndependents

s、StanfordUniversityandResourcesfortheFuture8

acrossincomelevels,thatdivideislesspronounced.Whereasthereisagreaterthan30-pointdifferencebetweenDemocratsandRepu