Caution in the use of populism to describe distributional considerations of climate policy

Abstract

Balancing effectiveness and broad social appeal of climate policy is not straightforward. Integration of distributional considerations into both the substance and framing of policy is one way to pursue this elusive balance. Driesen et al. provide helpful insight into the potential flow-on effects of the integration of climate and industrial policy. They highlight examples, particularly including the US Inflation Reduction Act, that incorporate protectionist industry interventions that the authors argue may paradoxically hinder coordinated efforts to mitigate climate change, for instance, by slowing the diffusion and availability of critical decarbonization technologies. Driesen et al. position these risks as stemming from a populist approach to climate policy.

In this brief Correspondence, I promote caution around the use of populism to describe substantive features of climate policy, separate to the political rhetoric that may be used to advance policy agendas.