Are you planning to launch an online survey soon (especially in an English-speaking country)?
Please send me a message, I'd like to propose you something to improve the data quality of the survey (it will not increase its duration, and we will both learn something in the process).
Very happy to have contributed to this megastudy to understand which interventions are most effective at increasing climate advocacy actions!
Not a model (I think the model you describe is pretty straightforward though) but empirical evidence on this: www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=...
Yes!
Feel free to repost the new post as I erased the original one :)
My "Principles for a Global Constitution" features in this second opus of contributions gathered by Joyeeta Gupta and her team (p. 35) along many others (e.g. @andreasbummel.bsky.social p. 78).
Feel free to send your contribution here: globalconstitution.org
globalconstitution.org/wp-content/u...
FYI, I am actually reposting it with a better post.
Local currencies could help Global South countries reclaim control over economic policy and respond to the climate crisis.
Hear from leading experts in a webinar on the topic:
π
Thursday 22 January
π 5:30 pm GMT
Register now to join the discussion:
Brilliant little online tool: Spin the globe and see what your life would have been like had you gotten a different draw in the place-of-birth lottery
h/t @leightjessica.bsky.social on LinkedIn
πVous cherchez un cadeau qui redonne de l'espoir Γ votre petite sΕur sur la possibilitΓ© de mettre fin au changement climatique ?
β¬οΈVoici "Un Plan mondial pour le climat et contre l'extrΓͺme pauvretΓ©", Γ©crit par votre serviteur et prΓ©facΓ© par @gabrielzucman.bsky.social.
www.fnac.com/a20586068/Ad...
The lack of rules on international carbon trading risks weakening the ambition of countries (like the EU or Japan) that will use it. In this blog post, after explaining the problem, I suggest ways to solve it.
medium.com/@lesgrains/a...
Here is the redistribution obtained from the median preferred parameters: 5% of (nominal) world income redistributed from the top 18% to the bottom 49%, financing a minimum income of $287/month (in PPP).
Such redistribution would be a game-changer for the global poor.
/end
Paper: bit.ly/Fabre2025
Finally, people can choose interactively their preferred global income redistribution.
You can do it too here: www.centre-cired.fr/en/custom-gl...
Below is a video explaining how the task works.
Interestingly, 48% choose a custom redistribution that makes them lose while only 9% choose to win.
π§Now, a word on support for more radical proposals.
Most people would accept an income tax on the global top 1% (resp. 3%): above $120k (resp. $80k) per year. This tax would collect 2% (resp. 5%) of world income and alleviate poverty below $250 (resp. $400) per month (in PPP).
π΄To sum up, most people in high-income countries would accept global redistribution policies.
π’People value climate change and global poverty, and agree their country should finance sustainable development.
π‘Few mobilize due to the low priority of this issue, but many could.
Belief that global redistribution is likely increases by 7 pp among informed respondents (33%->40%).
Under warm glow, support should *decrease* among convinced respondents.
I find the contrary: being convinced causally *increases* the number of global policies supported by 18 pp.
Belief that global redistribution is likely increases by 7 pp among informed respondents (33%->40%).
Under warm glow, support should *decrease* among convinced respondents.
I find the contrary: being convinced causally *increases* the number of global policies supported by 18 pp.
In case of warm glow, people express support to enjoy moral comfort as long as global policies appear unlikely and support harmless.
To test that, I inform a random half of respondents of ongoing international negotiations/initiatives.
The treatment increases support by 1 pp.
(To know more about the GCS,
see the video: bit.ly/CH_gcp
the free book - prefaced by Gabriel Zucman: bit.ly/bookGCP
a 2-pager: github.com/bixiou/globa...
or a work-in-progress academic proposal: github.com/bixiou/globa...)
Notice pluralistic ignorance of the support for the Global Climate Scheme (GCS):
The median respondent underestimates support in their country by 16 pp and in the US by 22 pp.
We also see that for a Climate Scheme: 69% support if participating countries cover 72% of world emissions, and still 65% support if it only covers 33% of emissions.
Support for an international policy decreases only slightly as country coverage shrinks.
We also see that for a wealth tax with 30% funding LICs: support is reduced from 74% in the case of global coverage to 68% if only a few countries participate.
Over two-thirds of people favor a sustainable future with half as much flying and beef consumption and without thermal cars, over the status quo that would maintain lifestyles.
Support for global redistribution stems from a sense of duty or empathy, not guilt or interest.
Consistent with this finding, there is no majority support for reparations for slavery or colonization. => The decolonial narrative is not the most effective for global redistrib.
Direct questions confirm this finding:
- 36% are more likely to vote for a party if it is part of a global coalition for sustainable development (vs. 17% less likely)
- 68% would support such a coalition (including 52% of the 584 millionaires who answered)
- 45% are universalists
The conjoint experiment indicates that global redistribution may be vote-determining for some people. A program is
- 4 p.p. more likely to be preferred if it contains a globally redistributive wealth tax
- 4 p.p. less likely to be preferred if it contains cutting development aid.
Then, still before they could infer the survey's topic, respondents faced a conjoint experiment, where they had to select their preferred political program among two programs composed at random.
Here is one example of a choice respondents could have faced:
People's most frequent concern is their purchasing power.
Global inequality has low salience, which may explain why so few policymakers campaign on it.
Before this question, respondents had to give their top-of-mind considerations in one variant of an open-ended field.
To see random responses of people: bit.ly/fields2025
Before respondents could infer the survey's topic, they had to allocate the revenue from a global wealth tax.
87% of respondents allocate a positive amount to the global item. This item receives an average preferred share of 17.5%, slightly below an equal split of 20%.
Radical proposals are also widely accepted.
At the end of the thread, I'll explore these radical proposals in more detail.
