↓ Skip to main content

PNAS

Article Metrics

Mass support for global climate agreements depends on institutional design

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
19 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
121 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Mass support for global climate agreements depends on institutional design
Published in
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, July 2013
DOI 10.1073/pnas.1306374110
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael M. Bechtel, Kenneth F. Scheve

Abstract

Effective climate mitigation requires international cooperation, and these global efforts need broad public support to be sustainable over the long run. We provide estimates of public support for different types of climate agreements in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Using data from a large-scale experimental survey, we explore how three key dimensions of global climate cooperation--costs and distribution, participation, and enforcement--affect individuals' willingness to support these international efforts. We find that design features have significant effects on public support. Specifically, our results indicate that support is higher for global climate agreements that involve lower costs, distribute costs according to prominent fairness principles, encompass more countries, and include a small sanction if a country fails to meet its emissions reduction targets. In contrast to well-documented baseline differences in public support for climate mitigation efforts, opinion responds similarly to changes in climate policy design in all four countries. We also find that the effects of institutional design features can bring about decisive changes in the level of public support for a global climate agreement. Moreover, the results appear consistent with the view that the sensitivity of public support to design features reflects underlying norms of reciprocity and individuals' beliefs about the potential effectiveness of specific agreements.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 4%
Switzerland 2 2%
Denmark 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 111 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 33%
Student > Master 18 15%
Researcher 16 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 7%
Student > Bachelor 9 7%
Other 29 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 54 45%
Environmental Science 13 11%
Unspecified 13 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 12 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Other 23 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 76. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 December 2018.
All research outputs
#183,563
of 12,281,604 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#4,366
of 77,107 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,415
of 149,629 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#113
of 911 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,281,604 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 77,107 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 149,629 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 911 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.