Backlash to fossil fuel phase-outs: the case of coal mining in US presidential elections

46Citations
Citations of this article
39Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Phasing out coal is a crucial lever in reaching international climate targets. However, the resulting jobs losses might trigger voter backlash, making phase-outs politically costly. Here, we present an analysis of the electoral response to coal mining job losses in US presidential elections using matched and bordering difference-in-difference estimators. Our findings confirm that fossil fuel phase-outs can result in voter backlash. In our main specification, we find a four percentage-point (pp) increase in the Republican vote share in 2012 (range across specs. = 3.6 pp-4.5 pp), declining to 3.2 pp in 2016 (range across specs. = 3.2 pp-4.2 pp), in counties suffering from coal mining job loss. The estimated electoral response is around three times as large as the number of jobs lost. We observe this response only in places where there was significant job loss, where these jobs accounted for a large share of locally available jobs and where income levels were low. Relative party strengths do not influence the results.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Egli, F., Schmid, N., & Schmidt, T. S. (2022). Backlash to fossil fuel phase-outs: the case of coal mining in US presidential elections. Environmental Research Letters, 17(9). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac82fe

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free