Geographical Insights on the Partisan Polarization of the Acceptance of Human-Caused Climate Change in the US

Abstract

Despite political partisanship, growing segments of the American public are concerned and even alarmed about climate change. Yet a common finding in the research literature is that climate change beliefs are filtered through an ideological lens. In this study, we examine whether politics remain a reliable indicator of climate change belief by comparing the percent margin of victory for both parties in the last four Presidential elections with the estimated percentage who think global warming is mostly caused by human activities in each county. There were increasing positive trends between the Democratic margin of victory and the acceptance of human-caused climate change. However, this effect was different for counties with different types of climate change beliefs. Election results were less reliable indicators of the acceptance of human-caused climate change in Republican-voting counties until the two most recent general elections in 2016 and 2020. The results underscore the partisanship of climate politics at the national level. Using the southeastern US as an example, this study highlights the need to understand the regional variability of climate change beliefs as an important step in finding less polarizing climate solutions.