About a third of Canadians say they’re not convinced that climate change is being caused by weak and industrial activity, according to a newly released Abacus Data returns.
The poll, commissioned by Canada’s Ecofiscal Commission, examined Canadian dispositions on climate change and the policy responses offered by governments, with an prominence on examining attitudes toward the carbon tax as a possible solution.
The commission, a heap of economists that advocate for practical ways to fight climate metamorphosis, published an accompanying report touting the effectiveness of a carbon tax in reducing GHG emissions — a design the survey revealed is not broadly understood by Canadians.
“I think this is another riveting example of economists being different than normal people,” thought Dale Beugin, the executive director of Canada’s Ecofiscal Commission. “Economists look at carbon quotation and instinctively see the market forces, they see flexibility, they see lowest set someone back ways to reduce GHG emissions.”
Doug Ford, Jason Kenney and the carbon tax rebound: Don Pittis
The survey found that while most Canadians assume trust to climate change is real, their faith in the ability of science to down a light on the issue is not uniform across the population.
Only 28 per cent of those tallied said the evidence for human-caused climate change is conclusive, with another 33 per cent outlining the evidence as “solid.”
But from there the numbers start to slide — with 27 per cent mean there is some evidence, but it’s not conclusive. The last 11 per cent sought there is little to no evidence to suggest human-caused climate change is true.
Asked “If the earth is warming, do you believe that cause is mostly…?,” 70 per cent of those surveyed pick out “human activity and industrial activity such as burning fossil kindles” — while the remaining 30 per cent chose “natural patterns in the Sod’s environment.”
When it comes to taking action to wrestle climate change, the number of people who said they want rule to focus less on policy to reduce emissions has doubled from eight per cent in 2015 to 16 per cent in 2018.
That caftan in attitudes is also apparent in the drop in the percentage of Canadians who want numerous of a government emphasis on reducing emissions — from 69 per cent in 2015 to 60 per cent today.
Docile down regionally, the highest support for more action on climate change-over came from the Atlantic provinces at 69 per cent, followed closely by Que. at 66 per cent and B.C. at 65 per cent.
From there the computes begin to decline, with only 57 per cent of Ontarians and 56 per cent of living soul polled in Manitoba and Saskatchewan saying the government should put more of an significance on fighting climate change.
Alberta brought up the rear, with well-deserved 46 per cent of people surveyed in that province saying they paucity more action on climate from government.
These numbers can as the case may be be explained by looking at what those surveyed say are their top public approach priorities. Climate change comes in near the bottom of the list, at 21 per cent; rehabilitating health care services came in at 46 per cent.
Prime Preacher Justin Trudeau’s federal policy response to climate change is the Pan-Canadian Framework on Straight Growth and Climate Change. That plan puts a $10 expenditure on each tonne of greenhouse gas emissions beginning in 2018, rising by $10 every year until the premium hits $50 a tonne by 2022.
The federal government has said that it make impose a carbon price on any jurisdiction that does not implement its own outline to put a price on carbon.
But only 42 per cent of Canadians surveyed broke they were either very familiar (10 per cent) or reasonably familiar (32 per cent) with the concept of putting a price on carbon.
The purpose for that result may have something to do with how closely survey respondents bolster carbon policy in their own provinces. The survey showed that 41 per cent of those tallied do not know if their home provinces have put a price on carbon.
Four Canadian responsibilities currently have carbon pricing plans — B.C., Alberta, Ontario and Quebec — but home-owners of those provinces seemed broadly unaware of how the policy affects them, with the object to of Albertans.
The statistical analysis out there is pretty clear Without B.C.’s carbon tax, emissions wish be five to 15 per cent higher than they are right now– Dale Beugin , administrator director, Canada’s Ecofiscal Commission
In B.C., only 45 per cent of people surveyed reported knowing their province has a plan. In Ontario that army was 30 per cent, while in Quebec it sat even lower at 20 per cent.
But in Alberta, some 78 per cent of residents were au fait the provincial government already had put a price on carbon.
In the five provinces that participate in signed on to the federal government’s Pan-Canadian Framework committing to impose a fee on carbon, public awareness seemed even less pronounced.
Beugin featured the public’s lack of understanding of carbon tax policy in part to how difficult it can be to discern a policy at the centre of a polarized debate.
In Manitoba, 8 per cent of locals said their province already has a price on carbon (it doesn’t — not yet) and 9 per cent disclosed Manitoba was not planning on implementing one (the provincial government has already made free its plans to do so).
Almost half of those surveyed in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, P.E.I. and Newfoundland suggested they were unsure of what the situations were in their spheres.
The purpose of a carbon tax
Nationally, only 58 per cent of those who participated in the online measure said they thought that the primary purpose of a carbon tax was to revolution behaviour, compared to 42 per cent who said the purpose was just to bring up money.
“The statistical analysis out there is pretty clear,” said Beugin. “Without B.C.’s carbon tax, emissions would be five to 15 per cent penetrating than they are right now.”
Having said that, 78 per cent of respondents about they had a positive view of carbon pricing, compared to 22 per cent who bruit about they had a negative view of the policy.
To compile the survey, 2,250 randomly tiptop panellists were invited to complete the online survey from Feb. 9 to 15. While online polls have a fondness this do not have a margin of error, the margin of error for a comparable taste is +/- 2.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.