Table 1 Logit Results

From: Public support for carbon pricing policies and revenue recycling options: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the survey literature

 

Dependent variable: Change in public support

 

Parameter Estimate

Marginal effect at mean

Number of observations

Revenue recycling scheme:

 Uniform cash transfers

(baseline: Public finance)

−0.60

(0.86)

−0.08

27

(24)

 Targeted cash transfers

(baseline: Public finance)

0.67

(0.46)

0.07

70

(24)

 Green spending

(baseline: Public finance)

3.09***

(1.08)

0.21

64

(24)

 Tax cuts – income, labour, and consumption

(baseline: Public finance)

0.69

(0.51)

0.08

34

(24)

 Corporate tax cuts

(baseline: Public finance)

−0.51

(0.47)

−0.07

40

(24)

Policy type:

 Carbon and environmental tax

(baseline: Fossil fuel subsidy reform)

1.2

(1.12)

0.15

244

(15)

Carbon pricing policy in place:

 Yes

(baseline: No)

0.73

(0.70)

0.08

194

(65)

Regions:

 Africa

(baseline: North America)

17.85***

(1.34)

0.26

13

(26)

 Asia and Pacific

(baseline: North America)

1.34**

(0.80)

0.14

69

(26)

 Europe and West Asia

(baseline: North America)

0.26

(0.69)

0.03

125

(26)

 Latin America and Caribbean

(baseline: North America)

2.67***

(1.01)

0.21

26

(26)

Survey type:

 Non-experimental

(baseline: experimental)

2.55 ***

(0.71)

0.35

213

(46)

 Pseudo-R2

0.29

  
  1. The table shows the baseline specification regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses as well as the marginal effects at mean.
  2. Dependent variable: change in public attitude with revenue recycling scheme.
  3. *p < 0.10, two-tailed test.
  4. **p < 0.05, two-tailed test.
  5. ***p < 0.01, two-tailed test.
Back to article page