Abstract
Carbon taxation is a core instrument for climate mitigation. Its implementation, however, faces popular resistance. In this paper we study one of the most emblematic mobilizations triggered by the carbon tax issue, the Yellow Vest movement in France. We use Q-methodology, a mixed-method approach to identify discourses (or viewpoints) held by protesters. We find four statistically-distinctive viewpoints, emphasizing respectively: a systemic critique of capitalism; environmental action that is fair; priority over incomes and purchasing power of common people; and inequality and the responsibilities of corporations. Our research points to the importance of ideology in shaping viewpoints and filtering attitudes towards carbon taxes. Yet beyond ideological differences, we find consensus among all discourses, in that there should be more consultation in energy transition policy; the rich and not the poor should pay the cost of transition; and the government should use tax revenue for the transition only. We conclude that, for bold carbon tax schemes to be implemented with less conflict, a much more participatory, transparent and equitable design would be necessary than the one experienced in France.
Highlights
On 17th November 2018, tens of thousands of people took to the streets in France
Why do people react to carbon taxes, and how can energy transition designs be improved by considering concerns that fuel protests such as those of the Yellow Vests (YVs)?
We approached these two questions by using a systematic discourse analysis approach, Q methodology, that allowed us to get a glimpse of prevalent viewpoints of active participants in a movement, rather than the population at large
Summary
On 17th November 2018, tens of thousands of people took to the streets in France. In the following weeks, blockades, protests and occasionally riots took place all over the country. The call to protest by a group of organizers who had met online was made simul taneously all over France (Blavier, M., May 2019, personal interview) .1. It was triggered by a hike in fuel prices – a rise in oil prices in October, and a new law to decrease speed limits from 90 km/h to 80 km/h (Blavier, M., May 2019, personal interview). According to Nicolas Hulot, minister for ecological transition, the carbon tax revenues were to be invested in making the energy transition, but, in reality, the tax revenues were not clearly earmarked for that purpose (Perthuis and Faure, 2018) This became a further source of discontent, as many believed the money would compensate for tax cuts for the rich (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
