It's the saliency, stupid

To Donald Trump's America, where large majorities of the public think he's doing a terrible job at pretty much everything, including tackling climate change.

The US may be the home of hyper-aggressive climate denialism and an administration that regards climate change as a hoax and clean energy as a con (or is it the other way round?), but according to fascinating new polling from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication most voters wish it wasn't so.

The results are genuinely striking. Over three quarters of the US public oppose ordering all federal agencies to stop providing information about global warming to the public, oppose ordering all federal agencies to stop doing research on global warming, and support US participation in the Paris Climate Agreement. Two thirds oppose Trump's efforts to prohibit construction of new offshore wind farms and 75 per cent of registered voters support generating renewable energy on public land. Over three quarters support more research into renewable energy sources and 66 per cent support transitioning the US economy from fossil fuels to 100 per cent clean energy by 2050.

The list goes on and on. From emissions regulations and wind power to climate science and adaptation, Trump is completely out of step with public opinion. Like pretty much everywhere else in the world, between two thirds and three quarters of the public are concerned about climate change, want bolder action from businesses and governments, and are supportive of clean technologies.

What, then, is going on? Why would people concerned about climate change elect a famous climate denier (and why would their cousins in the UK seriously consider doing the same)? Why are governments and businesses, including nominally progressive governments and corporations, so wary of staking out positions that large majorities support? 

Part of the answer is to be found in a separate data point revealed by the Yale poll. Clear majorities may want more climate action, but only one per cent regard climate change as the top issue when going to the ballot box. Consequently, only 41 per cent of voters say they would like to hear more from candidates about efforts to reduce global warming and fewer than half think global warming should be a high or very high priority for the President and Congress. There is a sizeable chunk of voters who think climate change is a serious problem when they think about it, but are pretty chilled about governments doing nothing about it the rest of the time. It's the saliency, stupid.

A critical question for those who want to catalyse much bolder climate action has to be how to boost these numbers. And it is worth reiterating these polling results are broadly replicated in most countries. Concern over climate change and the clean energy transition is high, but salience is usually significantly lower and opposition to climate action can be quickly mobilised if it is seen to run counter to other priorities, such as the cost of living. 

Perversely, the response to this dynamic from many centrists politicians and mainstream businesses has been to talk less about climate change. To focus on kitchen sink issues and deliverism, while quietly getting on with the business of decarbonising the economy without anyone noticing. But it is hard to see how this makes any sort of sense when an area that is regarded as a strength for your party is popular with the public, but rarely seen as a priority.

Meanwhile, as the US climate writer and campaigner Genevieve Guenther has repeatedly argued, climate denialist voices on the right of politics talk about climate change all they time. They invest huge amounts of time and energy in trying to turn their weakness into a strength, blaming climate change for pretty much anything and everything, no matter how ridiculous. If you believe Trump clean energy drives up energy bills, kills whales, and destroys American businesses, while the climate is not even changing. And too many supposedly savvy centrists tacitly accept this framing by failing to challenge it and refusing to vocally offer a compelling alternative narrative.

There is an obvious riposte to this nonsense, both in the US and here. Climate change may not be a priority for the public, but the things it is linked to absolutely are. The top two issues for voters - by a wide margin - are the cost of living and the economy. And two thirds of the US public think global warming is affecting the cost of living, while 49 per cent think policies intended to transition away from fossil fuels and toward clean energy will improve economic growth and provide new jobs, compared to 27 per cent who think the opposite.

The Trumpist argument is that climate change is not happening and is linked to bad things you don't like. And yet it is all too rarely countered by the simple - and true - argument that climate change is happening and is linked to truly terrible things you really hate. There is also far too little energy put into explaining that while decarbonisation may come with some near term costs, there are lots of ways in which clean technologies can deliver significant savings and enhanced security for everyone. People know something weird is happening to the climate and it is already having severe repercussions. Why not lean into a climate theory of everything that clear majorities instinctively understand?

As The Economist's Duncan Robinson noted yesterday, some of the biggest recent gains in climate policy can be linked directly to the street politics of protestors such as Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil. They may have angered politicians, antagonised commentators, and alienated some voters, but they also served to make climate issues salient - and policy gains followed surprisingly quickly. It is surely no coincidence that an anti-green backlash has gained momentum at precisely the same time as advocates for climate action - whether carrying placards or making statements from boardrooms - have gone quiet.

'Green-hushing' has done real damage over the past 12 months and it needs to end. The public want to see the climate crisis tackled. It should be the job of politicians, businesses, and campaigners to give them what they want. And tell them they are doing it.