Socioeconomic polarisation and green attitudes: evidence from ESS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71014/sieds.v80i4.561Abstract
This paper analyses the impact of income inequality on European citizens' attitudes towards the green transition, using data from Round 11 (2023) of the European Social Survey (ESS). Although there is extensive literature on the relationship between inequality and populist political attitudes, the same cannot be said when looking at the “green” orientation of the population. In particular, similar to the Kuznets curve, the relationship studied may take a non-linear form: in a non-polarised context, greater inequality should lead to a strengthening of environmentalist attitudes, while in a polarised context the sign of the relationship should be reversed. From a methodological point of view, the Gini index is calculated to measure inequality, while a binary logistic regression model is estimated to understand the probability of voting for green parties, considering not only polarisation but also individual socio-economic control variables. In addition, a Multilevel Linear Probability Model was used, which also allows for the impact of aggregate factors such as gross domestic product, population density and perceptions of environmental quality to be taken into account. The results show that higher levels of inequality are associated with a lower propensity to vote green. The study contributes to the literature by highlighting how socio-economic polarisation can influence environmental attitudes and support for ecological transition in Europe.
References
ALIYU U., BASHAR A. U., USMAN U. 2021. Predictors for risk factors of diabetes: binary logistic regression model approach. Int J Stat Distrib Appl, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 89–94.
BLEIDORN W., SCHILLING T., HOPWOOD C. J. 2025. High Openness and Low Conscientiousness Predict Green Party Preferences and Voting. Social Psychological and Personality Science, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 93–104.
CASSIN L., MELINDI-GHIDI P., PRIEUR F. 2021. Voting for environmental policy with green consumers: the impact of income inequality.
DEBUS M., TOSUN J. 2021. The manifestation of the green agenda: a comparative analysis of parliamentary debates. Environmental Politics, Vol. 30, No. 6, pp. 918–937.
DINDA S. 2004. Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: a survey. Ecological Economics, Vol. 49, No. 4, pp. 431–455.
GOURLEY P., KHAMIS M. 2023. It is not easy being a Green party: Green politics as a normal good. European Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 76, 102266.
HARRIS J. K. 2021. Primer on binary logistic regression. Family Medicine and Community Health, Vol .9, No. Suppl. 1, e001290.
HUO R., YANG S., DONG C., CHEN S. 2025. Perceived economic inequality inhibits pro‐environmental engagement. British Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 64, No. 2, e12815.
ISAAC L. 1982. Comparative economic inequality. Comparative Sociological Research in the 1960s and 1970s, pp. 62–85.
IVANOV D. 2023. Economic insecurity, Institutional trust and populist voting across Europe. Comparative Economic Studies, Vol. 65, No. 3, pp. 461–482.
KOSSE F., PIKETTY T. 2021. Electoral Cleavages and Socioeconomic In equality in Germany, pp. 1949–2017.
KRAMER G. H. 1971. Short-term fluctuations in US voting behavior, 1896–1964. American Political Science Review, Vol. 65, No. 1, pp. 131–143.
LIPPS J., SCHRAFF D. 2021. Regional inequality and institutional trust in Europe. European Journal of Political Research, Vol. 60, No. 4, pp. 892–913.
MARQUARDT J. 2024. How Greens turn gray: Green Party politics and the depoliticization of energy and climate change. Frontiers in Political Science, 5, 1301734.
MCAUSLAND C. 2003. Voting for pollution policy: the importance of income inequality and openness to trade. Journal of International Economics, Vol. 61, No. 2, pp. 425–451.
O’NEILL M. 2019. Green parties and political change in contemporary Europe: New politics, old predicaments. Routledge.
PANARELLO D. 2021. Economic insecurity, conservatism, and the crisis of environmentalism: 30 years of evidence. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Vol.73, 100925.
PAPP Z. 2022. Environmental attitudes, environmental problems and party choice. A large-N comparative study. Political Geography, Vol. 97, 102652.
PARK J.-W., KIM C. U. 2021. Getting to a feasible income equality. PloS One, Vol. 16, No. 3, e0249204.
POLLAK J., GRAND P. 2016. European Social Survey Round 8-Austrian dataset.
QADRI H. M. U. D., ZAFAR M. B., ALI H., TAHIR M. 2025. Wealth, Wisdom, and the Will to Protect: An Examination of Socioeconomic Influences on Environmental Behavior. Social Indicators Research, pp. 1–31.
REESE G. 2016. Common human identity and the path to global climate justice. Climatic Change, 134, pp. 521–531.
RONI S. M., DJAJADIKERTA H. G. 2021. Data analysis with SPSS for survey-based research. Springer.
PUTNAM R.D. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, New York, Simon and Schuster.
STOETZER L. F., GIESECKE J., KLÜVER H. 2023. How does income inequality affect the support for populist parties? Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 1–20.
VAZNONIS B., STAUGAITIS A. J., VAZNONIENĖ G. 2024. The interrelationship between pro-environmental attitudes and subjective well-being: the case of Central and Eastern European countries. Sustainability, Vol. 16, No. 8, 3434.
WHITLEY S. G., NELSEN B. F., GUTH J. L. 2023. Explaining Green Party support in the 2019 European Parliamentary Elections: A test of four hypotheses. Society, Vol. 60, No. 3, pp. 413–425.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Vincenzo Marinello, Rossella Maria Pia Di Rocco, Giulio Pedrini
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
