制度の質が市民の気候変動緩和責任の帰属を形成する

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Provides cross-national evidence on how institutional quality moderates public responsibility attribution for climate change mitigation.

🏛政策担当者:Suggests that climate policies should consider institutional context to align with public expectations of responsibility.

気候変動の緩和に主に責任を負うのは誰かについての国民の信念は国によって大きく異なり、このばらつきを説明する要因についてはほとんど知られていない。106か国（N = 101,728）のデータを用いて、国の制度の質（政府の有効性、規制の質、汚職の抑制、法の支配）の指標が、政府、企業、個人への気候責任の帰属をどのように形成するかを検討した。結果は、国の制度の質が高いほど、その国の市民が気候緩和の責任を企業に帰属する可能性が高いことを示した。対照的に、政府への責任帰属は、制度能力の側面（政府の有効性と規制の質）についてU字型の関係を示し、制度能力が非常に低い国または非常に高い国の市民は、政府に責任を負わせる可能性が高かった。個人への責任帰属は逆のパターン（逆U字型）を示し、制度の質が中程度の国の市民が個人を責任があると見なす可能性が最も高かった。これらの関連は、1人当たりGDP、気候変動の認識された重要性、および人口統計学的要因を制御した後も維持された。これらの発見は、制度の質のばらつきが、市民が気候変動緩和の責任をどのように割り当てるかに関連していることを示しており、気候緩和戦略は制度的文脈から切り離せないことを示唆している。

AI 翻訳（deepseek-v4-flash）。 正確を期す場合は下の原文を参照してください。

Public beliefs about who is primarily responsible for climate change mitigation vary widely across countries, and little is known about what explains this variation. Drawing on data from 106 countries ( N = 101,728), we examined how indicators of national institutional quality (government effectiveness, regulatory quality, control of corruption, and rule of law) shape people's attributions of climate responsibility to governments, businesses, and individuals. Results showed that the higher a country's institutional quality, the more likely its citizens were to attribute responsibility for climate mitigation to businesses. In contrast, government responsibility attributions followed a U-shaped relationship for institutional capacity dimensions (government effectiveness and regulatory quality), such that citizens in countries with very low or very high institutional capacity were more likely to hold governments responsible. Individual responsibility attribution showed the opposite pattern (inverted U-shaped), with citizens in countries with moderate institutional quality most likely to view individuals as responsible. These associations held after controlling for GDP per capita, perceived importance of climate change, and demographic factors. These findings show that variations in institutional quality are linked to how citizens assign responsibility for climate change mitigation, which suggests that climate mitigation strategies cannot be divorced from institutional contexts.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2026.103190first seen 2026-07-19 04:48:50