A couple of weeks ago the WSJ reported some results of a recent poll on the environment. The results are interesting in that they don't tell us very much. For example, the headline tells us that "Nearly Half of Americans Cite 'Too Little' Environment Regulation." The other half thinks that there is too much environmental regs!
The problem is not that the poll is poorly conducted (I'm guessing that Harris has figured out how to deal with the biases of an online survey):
Harris Interactive conducted this online survey in the U.S., Aug. 9-16, 2005, among a nationwide cross section of 1,217 adults.
It's just that the questions are too general. The most offensive question, to an economist, made me first think that the normal crowd doesn't understand costs very well ... then I thought that the question doesn't frame costs very well ... then I realized that there is little incentive to really consider the costs:
"Do you agree or disagree with this statement: Protecting the environment is so important that requirements and standards cannot be too high, and continuing environmental improvements must be made regardless of cost."
I would answer "strongly disagree" and, I'd wager, most economists would answer the same. Yet, 75% of all respondents, regular Joes and Josephines, agree (60% of Republicans and 85% of Dems). The smart-aleck economist (the guy/gal at the party that no one likes ... and who goes home alone) says: "Oh really? Is that what you really think? What if the cost is your annual salary? What if the cost is annual GDP?"
It's not that we don't think people are willing to give up some income for a greener globe. They are. But questions like the above are next to meaningless (except, maybe, when comparing Repubs and Dems and other groups, or tracking responses over time (people are slightly greener in 2005 than in 2000)). Economists think about income constraints and substitution possibilities (and, my fav, hypothetical bias (obligatory monthly link to the incromulent economics blog)), and these things will lower the greenie-ness of the general public.
So, what is the answer to the opinion poll prob? Tim has a forthcoming post on how some environmental economists like to ask questions about the tradeoffs between environmental quality and income (nudge, nudge). At that time, we'll reveal the Truth and the people will be amazed!
