International Climate Treaty Performance and Perceived Legitimacy

• In Event: Public Opinion, Collective Action, and Climate Change

Abstract

Climate change governance often occurs at the intergovernmental level due to the issue's transboundary and global commons nature. While climate change treaties, such as the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement, have been adopted through multilateral processes, backlashes against these efforts suggest that domestic support is crucial for the actual implementation. In this paper, we focus on the performance quality of climate treaties and how it affects public opinion regarding treaty legitimacy. We draw on the theoretical framework of policy effectiveness to conceptualize performance quality from three aspects: the output—the volume and scope of policies; the outcome—the extent to which countries' behaviors are altered; and the impact—the actual emission reduction achieved. We conduct conjoint experiments to test whether and how varying performance quality of treaties affect their perceived legitimacy, with nationally representative samples from the United States. We hypothesize that treaty outcome, that is, countries' behavior changes such as ratification and implementation, is likely to impact the perceived legitimacy. Treaty impact on emission reduction can also alter legitimacy beliefs. Finally, we posit that the respondent's political ideology has a strong intervening effect. International climate treaties, therefore, need careful design regarding performance quality to be politically acceptable and feasible.

Authors

• Bi Zhao, Gonzaga University

• Aaron Hitefield, Whitworth University