Local climate action works—especially when the public and the national government are on board

Our new study uncovers how public opinion shapes the supply of local climate policy, and how these policies, in turn, help reduce emissions.

Introducing our new study documented in “Climate action close to home: The role of public attitudes and policy responses in reducing GHG emissions.” The paper has been accepted for publication at Energy Research & Social Science (as of July 2025). (Working paper version available at SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5020017.)

With Manuel Ebner, Katya Rhodes, and Kevin Andrew.

The paper is a chapter of Manuel Ebner’s Ph.D. thesis, packed with (very) dense, (very) careful work. Huge congratulations to Manuel!!

Here is my TL;DR.

Across the globe, countries have made climate pledges. At the subnational level, too, there has been a sharp increase in climate mitigation initiatives since the 2000s. The IPCC now actively encourages local action in more recent reports. After all, states and municipalities are where buildings get retrofitted, public transport expands, and renewable energy projects often are approved.

But what drives cities and regions to act on climate? Does public sentiment matter? And does local climate policy really make a difference in emissions?

Our empirical study provides some compelling answers, at least for European countries. By building a rich panel dataset combining public opinion, policy counts, and emissions trends across hundreds of regions in European countries over more than a decade, we show how public support can accelerate policy action, and how that action delivers measurable climate results.

Findings 1: The public-policy link. Citizens push action (Yes we can.)

Public opinion matters. Regions where more people say climate change is a serious issue and that local governments are responsible tend to adopt more local climate policies.

• Note 1: The relationship is not just about richer or more educated regions being more environmentally active. Even after controlling for region characteristics, public concern stands out as a strong predictor.

• Note 2: Temporal dynamics also matter. In years where a region sees a noticeable increase in climate concern, there’s often a boost in new policies the following years.

Implications? Where citizens take climate seriously, they can create the political space for ambitious local action, and in politically responsive governments, such concern can drive policy even in the short term.

Findings 2: The policy-impact link. In emissions reduction, we trust.

Does having more policies actually reduce emissions? The answer is a qualified yes.

We find that regions with more local climate policies in place tend to have lower emissions levels, and they tend to achieve greater reductions over time.

• Note 1: One important detail is that the effectiveness of local action depends on how stringency of national-level climate policies are. (Listen, federal systems—you can’t just push things to “the cantons.”)

• Note 2: The effect is strongest for buildings-related policies, such as energy efficiency upgrades or sustainable heating systems. Possibly because these interventions directly affect local infrastructure and energy use, but these mechanisms are yet to be tested.

• Note 3: There is a time lag. The effect of local policies on emissions take several years to materialize. (Which can be tricky for politicians dealing with short electoral cycles. Constituency needs to be cool-headed and patient.)

• Note 4: It is not just about the number of policies. Regions that combine policy breadth (targeting multiple sectors) with policy density (adopting many policies over time) see the most substantial emission reductions.

Implications? Regions that implement broad and sustained local climate policies can achieve emissions reductions over time, but only with patience, persistence, and a strategy that goes beyond symbolic one-shot gestures.

Takeaway

If you are a city official or climate advocate, take heart! Your work matters. Local policies do reduce emissions, but success requires long-term vision (policy cycle), public engagement, and ideally, a progressive national government.

And if you are a citizen wondering whether your opinion counts? The answer is a clear yes. As this study shows, public concern drives policy, and policy drives results.

P.S. On Data: Building a unique panel dataset

A snapshot of the local climate policy data description based on the SSRN working paper.

In case you need a rough idea on what our study is based, here is a TL;DR on data. The backbone of this research is a comprehensive panel dataset spanning 670 subnational regions across 29 European countries between 2009 and 2020. It is based on multiple data sources:

• Emissions. Regional CO₂ emissions are from the EDGAR (Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research).

• Public opinion. Using Eurobarometer data, we track the proportion of respondents in each NUTS2 region who believe that (i) climate change is a serious concern, (ii) policies bring economic benefits, and (iii) the local government is responsible.

• Local policy action. The dataset includes information from the Covenant of Mayors (CoM) database. It’s a voluntary initiative where cities submit climate action plans. We counts the number of policies adopted in each region, across five domains: buildings, transport, public lighting, local energy production, and planning. In the robustness check, we distinguish more and less stringent policies to assess the effect of policy intensity—thanks to the reviewers for pushing on this, and great job, Manuel!

• Socioeconomic controls. Other regional characteristics (e.g., GDP per capita, education levels, and population size) are included as covariates.