Public Support for Environmental Regulation: When Ideology Trumps Knowledge
By Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt, Max R. P. Grossmann
DOI https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2503.10821
Abstract
When environmental regulations are unpopular, policymakers often attribute resistance to information frictions and poor communication. We test this idea in the context of a major climate policy: Germany’s Heating Law of 2023, which mandates the phase-out of fossil fuel heating. Through a survey experiment with property owners, we examine whether providing comprehensive information about the regulation’s costs, requirements, and timeline affects adoption decisions and policy support. Despite successfully increasing factual knowledge, information provision has no significant effect on intended technology adoption, policy support, or incentivized measures of climate preferences. Instead, pre-existing environmental preferences and demographic characteristics emerge as the key predictors of responses to the regulation. A feeling that existing systems still work well and cost considerations dominate fossil fuel users’ stated reasons for non-adoption, while independence from fossil fuels and perceived contributions to the common good drive adoption among switchers. Our findings suggest that opposition to climate policy stems from fundamental preference heterogeneity rather than information frictions. This has important implications for optimal policy design, highlighting potential limits of information provision in overcoming resistance to environmental regulation. The results also speak to broader questions in political economy about the relationship between knowledge, preferences, and support for policy reform.
Overview
The paper investigates whether giving people complete and balanced information about a major climate policy can change their opinions and intended actions. It focuses on Germany’s Heating Law (an amendment to the Building Energy Act from 2023) that pushes for a switch from fossil fuel heating to renewable, net-zero heating systems. In simple terms, the study asks: “If people learn all the facts about this law, will they support it more and change their behavior accordingly?”
What the Study Set Out to Do
Motivation and Background
Climate Challenge:
Climate change is one of today’s most significant economic and social challenges. Addressing it often requires both government action and public support.The Heating Law:
Germany’s Heating Law was introduced to reduce carbon emissions by requiring buildings to shift from fossil fuel-based heating (like oil and gas) to technologies that rely on renewable energy. Even though the law is designed to protect the environment, many people remained attached to their current, fossil fuel-based systems—partly because the law is expensive and requires significant changes.The Common Assumption:
Many have argued that the law’s lack of popularity is due to poor communication. In other words, if people were better informed about the law’s benefits and costs, they might support it.
Key Research Question
- Main Inquiry:
Does providing thorough, fact-based information about the Heating Law change property owners’ attitudes and behaviors regarding the law? Or are people’s opinions mainly driven by pre-existing beliefs (their “ideology”) and personal characteristics?
How the Study Was Conducted
Survey Experiment
The researchers used a survey experiment where German homeowners (including property owners and landlords) were randomly assigned to different groups. This method helps to test cause and effect because participants are randomly given different pieces of information.
Information Treatments
Four groups were created:
Baseline (Control Group):
No additional information was provided.Info Full:
Participants received a detailed and balanced overview of the law’s key aspects (for example, when bans on fossil systems would be implemented, fines for non-compliance, and subsidies for switching to renewable heating).Info Strict:
This version emphasized the strict elements of the law (such as the bans and potential fines) to make the law seem tougher.Info Lenient:
Here, the focus was on how the law was less strict than originally discussed (for example, noting that an immediate ban was only proposed but not implemented).
Note: In all cases, the information was truthful and designed to be balanced.
Outcome Measures
After the information was provided, the survey measured several outcomes:
Attitudes toward the Law:
Participants rated their agreement with the idea that “the law is sensible” using a simple scale.Technology Adoption:
They were asked about their current heating system and if they planned to switch to a renewable (non-fossil) technology.Factual Knowledge:
A quiz with 12 questions about the law was used to see how much factual knowledge the participants had gained.Incentivized Behavior:
Participants were given a hypothetical €100 to divide between themselves and two charities (one promoting individual freedom and the other focused on climate protection). This decision helped reveal their true preferences.Motivations:
The survey also asked why participants would or would not switch from fossil fuel heating. For example, those against switching mentioned the high cost and belief that their current system works well, while those in favor mentioned reducing dependence on fossil fuels and contributing to the common good.
What the Researchers Found
Increase in Factual Knowledge
- The treatments (especially “Info Full”) were successful in increasing participants’ factual understanding of the Heating Law. This was evident from higher scores on the quiz.
No Change in Attitudes or Behavior
Attitudes Unchanged:
Despite the increased knowledge, participants did not show a significant change in how sensible they thought the law was.No Impact on Technology Choices:
The information did not significantly affect whether participants planned to switch from fossil fuel-based heating to renewable systems.Incentivized Preferences:
Even when real (albeit hypothetical) money was on the line (through the charity donation task), there was no significant shift in their support for climate protection over other priorities.
Role of Pre-existing Beliefs
The study revealed that people’s pre-existing environmental values (their ideology) and demographic factors (like income or education) were much stronger predictors of their attitudes toward the law than the new information provided.
In other words, if someone already believed in protecting the environment, they were more likely to support the law regardless of the additional facts. Conversely, those who were skeptical about environmental regulation remained so, even after learning more details.
Inferred Conclusions and Implications
Main Conclusion
- Ideology Over Information:
The paper concludes that simply providing factual, balanced information does not change people’s opinions or intended behaviors regarding climate policy. Instead, deep-seated beliefs (ideology) and personal factors dominate how people respond to such policies.
Implications for Policy and Communication
For Policymakers:
Relying solely on improved communication and factual information to win public support for environmental regulations might be ineffective. Policymakers may need to address the underlying ideological differences and the structural challenges (like high costs) that drive opposition.For Future Research:
The study calls for a broader look at why people oppose certain policies, suggesting that future strategies should combine information with approaches that engage with people’s values and lived experiences.
Explanation of Technical Terms
Survey Experiment:
A research method where participants are randomly assigned to different groups (treatments) to test the effect of those treatments on their responses.Factual Knowledge:
The correct understanding of specific details about a topic. In this study, it was measured with a quiz about the Heating Law.Ideology:
A set of beliefs or values that shape how individuals view public policies. Here, it refers to pre-existing attitudes about the environment and climate protection.Incentivized Behavior:
Actions measured under conditions where participants have a real or simulated stake (for instance, making a donation decision) to reveal their true preferences.Balanced Information:
Information presented in a way that is complete and objective, without trying to persuade in one direction.
Final Thoughts
The study “Public Support for Environmental Regulation: When Ideology Trumps Knowledge” provides important insights into why some environmental policies, like Germany’s Heating Law, may remain unpopular even when people are given all the facts. The key takeaway is that underlying beliefs and personal circumstances play a far larger role than simply how much people know about the policy. For those working on climate policies, this means that efforts to increase support may need to go beyond better communication and instead address the fundamental differences in values and practical concerns among the public.