Abstract

ABSTRACTDoes democratization help countries mitigate climate change? On the one hand, by increasing the value placed on quality of life, creating more opportunity for environmental actors to influence policymaking and holding elected politicians accountable, an increase in democratic institution and process should promote emissions reduction. On the other hand, the desire to safeguard individual freedom presumably brings with it an aversion to intervene in lifestyle and market decisions, thereby raising the risk of climate inaction. This outcome is further encouraged by the political need to balance (conflicting) environmental and energy interests.This article evaluates the thesis that democratization promotes mitigation in light of national emissions levels from 1990 to 2012. Using data from the Freedom House, Polity IV and V-Dem indices, World Bank World Development Indicators and the World Resources Institute Climate Data Explorer it conducts a large-N investigation of the emissions levels of 147 countries. Although several quantitative studies have found that domestic political regimes affect emissions levels, this article goes beyond existing research by building a more sophisticated – multilevel- research design to determine whether democracy: (a) continues to be an important driver of emissions when country-level clustering is accounted for and (b) has uniform effects across countries. The results indicate that, even after controlling for country-level clustering and holding constant the other confounding factors, democracy is indeed a significant driver. More strikingly, they reveal that while democracies tend to have lower emissions than non-democracies, democratization spells within the same country do not have the same kind of inhibitory effects as they do between countries. This article also finds tentative evidence that the type of electoral system plays a critical role in shaping the effect of democratization on individual countries.Key policy insightsDemocracies tend to perform better in terms of emission levels than non-democracies.Democratization has non-uniform effects across different countries, with the type of electoral system playing a key role in determining the effect that democratization has on national emissions.Further research is needed to develop our understanding of how the political context influences emissions, especially with regard to the influence of pro and anti-decarbonisation actors.

Highlights

  • Before being elected Vice President in 1992, Al Gore (1992, p. 179) described ‘the spread of democratic government to more nations of the world ... [as] an essential prerequisite for saving the environment’

  • Consistent with the conventional - optimistic - approach, these results suggest that, on average and while keeping constant the other main drivers such as population, economic activity, fossil fuel dependency, technology and emissions decoupling, a one-point increase in the Freedom House (FH) democracy index is associated with a 84.87 Mt decline in CO2 emissions

  • Even when country-level clustering is accounted for, the democratic quality of domestic political regimes has a significant effect on emissions levels

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Before being elected Vice President in 1992, Al Gore (1992, p. 179) described ‘the spread of democratic government to more nations of the world ... [as] an essential prerequisite for saving the environment’. Full details of the control variables are given in the technical appendix.5 Accounting for these variables renders the predicted changes in absolute emissions levels comparable across countries as coefficient estimates denote the average democratization effect that is likely to take place if all countries possessed the same values for all of EMLEVEL DEM GDP EXPORTDIV ANNEX FFDEP TECH

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (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