Personal attributes and (mis)perceptions of local environmental risk

Individuals' risk perceptions shape their attitudes and behaviors, and to the extent that governments respond to public demands, they also influence public policy priorities. Conversely, risk misperceptions—that is, when risk perceptions do not align with realities—may lead to suboptimal behaviors and inefficient public policy. This study investigates the phenomena of environmental risk misperceptions. Specifically, with an original survey that enables a direct comparison of perceived and actual environmental risks at the local level, it examines the relationships between personal attributes and risk misperceptions. The findings show that individuals exhibit optimism bias in assessing local environmental risk. On average, people rank their communities as experiencing less risk from toxic air pollution than objective measures suggest. Moreover, Whites, males, conservatives, and older people tend to have larger optimism bias and have lower chances of possessing correct risk perceptions than their counterparts, respectively, while respondents who are married, poor, who go to church regularly, and have strong pro-environmental orientation, tend to have smaller optimism bias and have higher chances of possessing correct risk perceptions than their respective counterparts. The systematic misperception of local environmental risk underscores the importance of information provision and risk communication, and the sociopolitical correlates of misperception suggest that targeted and more nuanced strategies are required to correct misperceptions.     

Hardening corporate accountability in commodity supply chains under the European Union Deforestation Regulation

The European Union (EU) has recently introduced the Deforestation Regulation to close regulatory gaps in the sustainability and legality of global forest and agricultural commodity supply chains. We analyze this regulatory policy change by drawing on accountability scholarship and institutionalist theories of regulation. Our results show that the Regulation aims to enhance corporate accountability mechanisms through mostly state-based hard regulation of commodity supply chains, reducing the role of market incentives and private regulation. This policy change is found to be the result of strategic policy-oriented learning from perceived accountability failures of existing soft market-based instruments, voluntary trade agreements, and experience with market-correcting EU timber legality trade rules in a politically favorable context. The institutionalization of new forest-risk commodity supply chain accountability norms in new EU trade rules would, by design, harden foreign corporate accountability for negative socio-environmental externalities. However, the de-facto hardening will depend on the final regulatory design, acceptance, compliance, implementation, enforcement improvements, and avoidance of leakage effects.     

Why are the highly educated more sympathetic towards welfare recipients?

Stigmatising stereotypes about welfare recipients play a crucial role in building public support for welfare retrenchment. Existing literature finds that the highly educated are more sympathetic towards welfare recipients. This is surprising given the economic advantage associated with educational attainment. Furthermore, educational attainment has increased even as sympathy for welfare recipients has declined. I address these puzzles using three decades of British survey data and find that it is the socially liberal attitudes rather than the economic advantage associated with higher education that explains why this group is sympathetic towards welfare recipients. These findings reveal an educational cleavage in stereotypes about welfare recipients, which is based on non-economic concerns, and has implications for support for welfare retrenchment and policies such as increased conditionality. This cleavage is weaker in more highly educated regions, implying that there are diminishing returns from increasing educational attainment in terms of sympathetic attitudes towards welfare recipients.