1
Ecological economics in he age o ea
Roldan Mu adian1 and Unai Pascual 2,3,4
1. Facul y o Economics. Uni e sidade Fede al Fluminense, Rio de Janei o, B azil; 2 Basque Cen e o
Clima e Change (BC3), Leioa, Spain; 3Basque Founda ion o Science, Ike basque, Spain; 4.Cen e o
De elopmen and En i onmen , Uni e si y o Be n, Swi ze land.
Abs ac
Fa igh poli ical mo emen s a e ising and seizing powe in many in luen ial coun ies, a ec ing no
only he go e nance o democ a ic egimes bu also he science-policy ela ionship and he global
en i onmen al agenda. He e we disen angle he oo s o such ‘ a igh insu gency’ and discuss he
implica ions o ecological economics as a ield. We p opose ha in o de o be able o unde s and and
add ess his phenomenon, ecological economis s should de o e a en ion o analyse how he e olu ion o
alue sys ems (including en i onmen al alues) is ela ed o he p o ile and go e nance o con empo a y
global capi alism. By means o de eloping a ele an esea ch agenda, ecological economics could
con ibu e o he academic suppo o he ‘poli ics o hope’, in esponse o he ‘poli ics o ea ’ on which
eme ging au ho i a ian egimes ely.
Keywo ds: Sus ainabili y, pos - u h poli ics, au ho i a ian egimes, a - igh insu gency
This documen is he Accep ed Manusc ip e sion o a Published Wo k ha appea ed in inal o m in:
Mu adian R., Pascual U. 2020. Ecological economics in he age o ea . ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS. 169. DOI (10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106498).
© 2019 Else ie B.V. All igh s ese ed.
This manusc ip e sion is made a ailable unde he CC-BY-NC-ND 3.0 license h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/
2
1. In oduc ion
We a e wi nessing he ise o a global poli ical a - igh wa e. This phenomenon has impo an
consequences no only o he go e nance o democ a ic egimes and he science-policy ela ionship bu
also o na ional, egional and global en i onmen agendas. Ve y conse a i e candida es and a igh
poli ical pa ies ha e isen o powe ia elec ions in he U.S., Poland, Hunga y, I aly, India, Tu key, he
Philippines and B azil, o name a ew, while in o he democ a ic coun ies hey a e inc easing hei
poli ical ep esen a ion and in luence. These poli ical phenomena a e he esul o di e en socio-
economic and cul u al p ocesses (Ça koğlu and Kalaycıoğlu, 2009; Skocpol and Williamson, 2012;
Buzogány, 2017; Main, 2018; Maxwell, 2018), bu hey a e inc easingly sel -awa e, in e connec ed and
uni ied wo ldwide (Cas elli and Pi o, 2018).
1
Al hough hey do no hold homogenous posi ions, he leade s and poli ical pa ies ha cons i u e his ‘ a -
igh insu gency’ sha e a leas en common ea u es: (1) A nega i e esponsi e s and owa ds ‘globalism’,
and p e e ence o economic na ionalism; (2) opposi ion o immig a ion; (3) e y conse a i e posi ions
owa ds gende ela ions and sexual p e e ences; (4) opposi ion o a i ma i e ac ion and igh s
di e en ia ion a o ing unde p i ileged social g oups; (5) an i-eli is sen imen s, pa icula ly owa ds
adi ional poli ical and in ellec ual eli es, hough hei economic policies end o a o he economic
eli es; (6) dis ega d o low conce n o en i onmen al issues, and in se e al ins ances, denial o global
en i onmen al p oblems, including clima e change; (7) symbolic appeal o a golden na ional pas ha has
been los , associa ed wi h his o ical e isionism; (8) an ideological basis o en suppo ed by unp o en
p oposi ions and conspi acy heo ies; (9) p e e ence o an au ho i a ian and agg essi e leade ship s yle
con es ing poli ical co ec ness in discou se and habi s; and (10) dis ega d o scien i ic e idence,
his o ical ac s and empi ical da a ha con adic hei ideological posi ions and co e alues. The elec ion
o au ho i a ian leade s has become one o he pa hs o he eme gence o hyb id poli ical egimes ha
hold cha ac e is ics o bo h au oc acies and o mal democ acies, a poli ical phenomenon ha has been
coined as ‘compe i i e au ho i a ianism’ (Le i sky and Way, 2002; Came on, 2018)
He e we aim o discuss he o igins and consequences o his phenomenon and he implica ions o he
esea ch agenda o sus ainabili y science and ecological economics in pa icula . The basic ques ions ha
guide he cu en a icle a e: (1) is he simul aneous eme gence o he a - igh and eac iona y mo emen
in di e en pa s o he wo ld a coincidence o does i e lec deep social phenomena wi h common
unde lying causes?, and (2) how should sus ainabili y science in gene al, and ecological economics in
1
This is shown, o ins ance, by he es ablishmen o "The Mo emen ", a hink ank ecen ly ounded by S e e
Bannon and headqua e ed in B ussels, which aims o link, s eng hen and p o ide s a egic da a o Eu opean a -
igh poli ical pa ies.
3
pa icula , deal wi h a ising in luen ial mo emen ha holds a con on a ional s ance owa ds bo h he
en i onmen al agenda and he ole o science in decision making? Fi s , we cha ac e ize he a - igh
insu gency, including i s o igins and psychological ounda ions. We hen u n in o i s implica ions o he
en i onmen al agenda and he policy-science in e ace. Finally, we discuss he consequences ha his
phenomenon may ha e o sus ainabili y science and ou line a esponsi e esea ch agenda o ecological
economics.
2. The oo s o he cu en a - igh insu gency
In high-income coun ies, a - igh poli ical ideology had i s peak in he 1930s. Ne e heless, since he
end o he second Wo ld Wa (WWII), and mo e pa icula ly a e he end o he Spanish and Po uguese
dic a o ships, a - igh poli ical mo emen s we e mo ally ep essed and os acized in Eu ope and he U.S.
In o he wo ld egions, such as in La in Ame ica, a - igh dic a o ships ook much longe o be
o e h own, bu a e e-democ a iza ion du ing he la e 1980s, a - igh ideology expe ienced ela i e
poli ical isola ion.
A e WWII, high income coun ies expe ienced an in e -gene a ional change in wo ld iews. Acco ding
o Ingleha (1977), du ing he pos -wa pe iod he e was a p og essi e ise o he p opo ion o people
holding wha he called ‘pos -ma e ialis alues’, pa icula ly among he middle class you h, which had
g ea e access o educa ion, as compa ed o he p e ious gene a ion. The shi om ma e ialis o pos -
ma e ialis alues e e s o a change o emphasis (in basic alues) om law and o de and economic
p ospe i y o sel -exp ession, ee choice, cosmopoli anism and a highe conce n o global public goods,
including he en i onmen . This change in alue sys em induced e ec s on a a ie y o issues, including,
o ins ance, g ea e ole ance owa ds ou g oups, openness owa ds sexual p e e ences, as well as he
h i e o eminism and he eme gence o g een poli ical pa ies. The in e -gene a ional cul u al shi was
explained as he esul o a pa icula se o condi ions in high income coun ies du ing he pos -wa pe iod
(which coincided wi h he golden age o capi alism), such as a good economic pe o mance, a
consolida ion o he wel a e s a e and sus ained peace. These condi ions, he a gumen ollows, c ea ed
enough social s abili y and sense o secu i y o enabling he sp ead o pos -ma e ialis alues.
Ingleha ’s (2000) heo y s esses he ole o he eeling o physical and economic secu i y in de e mining
alue o ien a ion. The ecen backlash agains pos -ma e ialis alues, e lec ed in he elec ion o Donald
T ump in he U.S., and he ising suppo o xenophobic, populis and au ho i a ian mo emen s in high
income coun ies, has been explained by Ingleha and No is (2017) and Ingleha (2018) as he
consequence o declining exis en ial secu i y du ing he pas decades, ela ed o he ‘winne - akes-all’
p o ile o he knowledge economy, join ly wi h ex eme and ising income inequali y, declining eal
income o he wo king class, and inc easing job insecu i y in a con ex o a apid p ocess o economic
4
globaliza ion ha also spu ed demog aphic changes h ough mig a ion. Following Bou dieu (1998) and
along a simila a gumen a ion line, Bauman (2000; 160) s a es ha "p eca iousness, ins abili y,
ulne abili y is he mos widesp ead (as well as he mos pain ully el ) ea u e o con empo a y li e
condi ions". Michel Foucaul is also pa o an in ellec ual adi ion ha sees insecu i y as a s uc u al
ea u e o he capi alis mode o p oduc ion. Dange , o insecu i y, was seen by him as a s uc u al cos in
libe al go e nance egimes. Acco ding o Foucaul (2008; 67), " he e is no libe alism wi hou a cul u e
o dange ". F om his pe spec i e, he ising sense o exis en ial insecu i y would be he esul o he
adical expansion o neo-libe al policies in he ecen his o y o global capi alism.
The globaliza ion o neolibe al policies has exace ba ed he unce ain condi ion o labo in he capi alis
p oduc ion sys em, pa icula ly in high income coun ies, while educed he ba gaining powe o labo
is-a- is capi al in gene al. Wi h he in ensi ica ion o capi al mobili y and he eme gence o in o ma ion
echnologies, capi alism in co e coun ies has en e ed a new phase, in which employmen is becoming
inc easingly sho - e m and p eca ious. Addi ionally, public adminis a ions in high income coun ies a e
losing capaci y o add ess ca ed ma e s o ci izens, esul ing in a weakened wel a e s a e and inc easing
discon en wi h he poli ical eli e (Bauman, 2005). Beck (2000) coined he e m ‘second mode ni y’ o
desc ibe he phase o capi alism ha a ose a e he all o he o dis socie y in high income coun ies.
The new phase is cha ac e ized by he dissolu ion o p e ious ‘secu i ies’ ha we e sough a e , such as
he economic so e eign y o he na ion-s a e, job s abili y and ull employmen , and a sa e en i onmen ,
among o he s (Sø ensen and Ch is iansen, 2013). In he second mode ni y wha p e ails is a "poli ical
economy o inequali y, unce ain y and loss o bounda y" (Beck, 2000; 75). This is coupled wi h p eca i y.
o loss o he secu i y associa ed wi h he wel a e s a e (Casas-Co és, 2014), including he educ ion o
wel a e p o isions and labo igh s (Masquelie , 2018).
The e m ‘p eca ia ’ (S anding, 2011; Jo gensen, 2015) as applied in high-income coun ies, e e s o
labou e s wi h a signi ican highe deg ee o p eca iousness (in e ms o du a ion, labo igh s and sala y),
as compa ed o he p e ious phase o capi alism. The p eca ia pe cei es ha hei wo king condi ions
ha e de e io a ed when compa ed wi h p e ious gene a ion. Indeed, du ing pas ew decades he e has
been a sha p decline in social mobili y ac oss gene a ions in se e al high-income coun ies (S uhle ,
2018), and an impo an sha e o he wo king class can be conside ed o be among he main lose s o
economic globaliza ion (Milano ic, 2016). On he con a y, he ul a- ich, bo h in high income and
eme ging coun ies ha e been among he main bene icia ies. Ano he sou ce o exis en ial insecu i y in
high-income coun ies is ela ed o he inwa d low o a non-na i e labo o ce, gene ally cons i u ed by
immig an s ha do no sha e he domes ic dominan cul u al and eligious backg ounds. The discou se o
a - igh in Eu ope and he U.S., ounded on an i-cosmopoli anism and on ou g oup p ejudices, end o
po ay immig an s as h ea s o bo h na ional and indi idual secu i y. The iden i ica ion o social g oups
ha a e he subjec o s e eo yping, s ong p ejudices and scapegoa ing is a common ea u e in a igh
5
au ho i a ian egimes. The iden i ica ion o enemies is a co e impe a i e in he poli ics o ea . As in many
au ho i a ian a - igh egimes, such as in B azil which has ela i ely low a es o immig a ion, so-called
‘ hugs and communis s’ end o be po ayed as main sou ces o social h ea s by he a - igh poli ical
discou se.
The phenomenon o he p eca ia , howe e , canno explain signi ican changes in he alues o poli ical
p e e ences in de eloping coun ies. E en hough undeniably he e ha e been imp o emen s in he
condi ion o labo du ing he pas cen u y, low-skilled wo ke s in de eloping coun ies ha e ne e gained
enough ba gaining powe in o de o achie e wo king condi ions simila o he ones ensu ed by he
wel a e s a e o high income coun ies du ing he golden age o capi alism. Bo h high le els o p eca i y
among low-skilled wo ke s and a high sha e o he labo o ce being alloca ed o he in o mal sec o (and
he e o e wi hou labou igh s) ha e been s uc u al condi ions in pe iphe al coun ies since hei
inse ion in o he global capi alis sys em (B eman, 2013; Lannen e al 2019). Mos de eloping coun ies
ne e expe ienced a comple e ‘ i s mode ni y’ in Beck's (2000) e ms as hey ne e became ull o dis
socie ies. Al hough as compa ed o high income coun ies social mobili y in de eloping coun ies has
been lowe and such mobili y has la gely s alled since he 1960s (Na ayan e al., 2018), du ing he pas
wo decades he e has been a ema kable ise o he middle class in Asia (B andi and Büge, 2014), and
du ing he pe iod 2001-2011 mos La in Ame ican economies expe ienced a peculia his o ical phase
cha ac e ized by high a es o economic g ow h, declining income inequali y and signi ican educ ions
in income po e y a es (Lus ig e al., 2013)
2
. Hence, in de eloping coun ies, he co e sou ce o
exis en ial insecu i y is no necessa ily associa ed wi h an inc easing sense o de e io a ion o wo king
condi ions.
Al hough he nos algia o he o dis mode o p oduc ion and consump ion is no p esen in mos
de eloping coun ies, he su ge o a - igh poli ical mo emen s in hese egions can be associa ed wi h a
phenomenon sha ed wi h high-income coun ies: he con empo a y c isis o libe al democ acies, d i en
by mis us in adi ional poli ical eli es (Cas ells, 2018). In La in Ame ica, he ecen elec ion o Jai
Bolsona o in B azil cons i u es an exempla y case o a - igh insu gency ueled by massi e mis us in
he poli ical sys em. The backd op o Bolsona o elec ion has been he con e gence o se e al c ises du ing
he pe iod 2014-2018: (1) a se e e economic down u n due o he end o he commodi y boom, inducing
s agna ion o social mobili y and highe unemploymen a es; (2) he eme gence o la ge-scale co up ion
scandals; (3) a high and ising incidence o iolence and c iminali y, especially in u ban a eas; and (4) a
poli ical legi imacy c isis ha esul ed in he impeachmen o he p esiden Dilma Rousse . La ge scale
co up ion scandals and he apid de e io a ion o public se ices due o he economic decline ha e
2
A leas in B azil howe e his endency has been e e sed, wi h a s eady inc ease in income inequali y since
he end o he commodi y boom
6
exace ba ed he eeling o abandonmen o he ci izens by he s a e and he pe cep ion ha he poli ical
eli e does no se e he in e es o lay people. In addi ion, he long- e m dissemina ion o e angelical
chu ches ha seized di ec poli ical ep esen a ion and exe s ong media in luence (Machado, 2012;
Ca anza and Da Cunha, 2018) ha e c ea ed a e ile g ound o Bolsona o’s a - igh populism.
Despi e he ac ha he speci ic socio-poli ical and economic backd op o a - igh insu gency in di e en
pa s o he wo ld di e , he e seems o be some common elemen s: a ela i e high incidence on he
popula ion o mis us in poli ical ep esen a i es, he pe cep ion o in e nal o ex e nal h ea s, and a
s ong sense o insecu i y, unce ain y and ea , ei he in he domain o physical in eg i y, wo ld iews o
economic pe o mance. The discou se o a los be e pas is also a common elemen . Fo example, in he
case o B azil, he a - igh imagina y has adop ed he pe iod o he mili a y dic a o ship (1964-1985) as
he e e ence.
3. The psychology o ea and au ho i a ianism
3.1 Cons uc s o assessing au ho i a ian p e e ences
Why a e pe iods o c isis, and he ela ed inc ease in he sense o insecu i y, associa ed wi h a shi o
p e e ences by lay people owa ds au ho i a ian and a - igh poli ical op ions? The ield o poli ical
psychology has made impo an con ibu ions ying o answe his ques ion by analyzing empi ically he
ela ionship be ween psychological p o iles and poli ical p e e ences (including hose o
au ho i a ianism). Two impo an analy ical cons uc s assumed o e lec au ho i a ian a i udes a e
‘Social Dominance O ien a ion’ (SDO) and ‘Righ Wing Au ho i a ianism’ (RWA). SDO e e s o
p e e ences o dominance o some social g oups o e o he s and o in e -g oup inequali y (P a o e al.,
1994); RWA e lec s indi iduals’ p e e ences o coe cion, social con ol o de ian beha io ,
con en ionalism, submission o au ho i y, and hie a chical leade ship s yles (Al emeye , 1996). Schola s
ha ha e assessed he incidence o SDO and RWA in he popula ion a e pa o an academic adi ion
conce ned abou he poli ical implica ions o he ‘au ho i a ian mind’.
3
This esea ch s and aims o
unde s and why au ho i a ian poli ical ideologies ind mo e esonance in some indi iduals and social
g oups han in o he s (Jos e al., 2009), an issue ha can o e insigh s o explaining he cu en ise o
au ho i a ianism in libe al democ acies (Pe ig ew, 2017). Two key unde lying assump ions o his s eam
a e ha people a e d awn o belie sys ems ha bes esona e wi h hei psychological mo i es, and ha
speci ic psychological ai s, such as social a i udes, can la gely de e mine adhe ence o au ho i a ian
leade s and suppo o au ho i a ian poli ical iews and alues (Hennes e al., 2012).
3
This esea ch s and s a ed a e he end o WWII wi h he wo k o schola s such as Theodo Ado no who was
in e es ed in unde s anding he psychological ounda ions o he ise o ascism in Eu ope (Ado no e al., 1950).
7
Bo h SDO and RWA use me ics based on he in ensi y o ag eemen by people owa d p oposed
s a emen s. Bo h ha e been ound o be posi i ely ela ed o conse a i e social and poli ical a i udes,
ideologies and alues (Whi ley and Lee, 2000; P a o e al., 2006; Sibley and Ducki , 2010; Ho e al.,
2011; Wilson and Sibley, 2013). SDO and RWA indica o s also end o be posi i ely co ela ed wi h
expe iencing insecu i y, h ea and dange (Dhon and Hodson, 2014; Juge and Ducki , 2009; Shook e
al., 2017). This concu s wi h o he s udies ha epo a posi i e ela ionship be ween he sense o ea and
a p opensi y o hold conse a i e and au ho i a ian iews (Ducki and Fishe , 2003; Nail e al., 2009;
Jos e al., 2007a; Jos e al., 2009; Jos e al., 2017b). This migh pa ly explain why he ‘poli ics o ea ’
is mo e equen in he conse a i e side o he poli ical spec um (Jos e al., 2017c). Indi iduals unde
a psychological s a e o insecu i y and eeling o ex e nal h ea also end o de end hei iews igo ously
(Webb, 1998). Au ho i a ianism has also been epo ed o be associa ed wi h cogni i e igidi y and
in ole ance o ambigui y (Duncan and Pe e son, 2014), which migh in u n explain skep icism owa ds
scien i ic e idence, including disbelie in clima e change (Jessani and Ha is 2018).
In addi ion, ecen s udies epo ha conse a i e indi iduals end o ha e mo e homogenous online
ne wo ks (Jos , 2017a), possibly ela ed o an unde lying psychological endency o block in o ma ion
and da a ha challenge hei co e belie s and in e es s. Compa ed o o he g oups, conse a i e indi iduals
also end o sys ema ically o e es ima e mo e he p e alence o hei own opinions in he wide popula ion
(Jos , 2017c), and o esis e ising o co ec ing hei opinions when hey pe cei e ha hese a e sha ed
wi hin hei social ne wo ks (Lewandosky e al., 2017).
3.3. The aga ies o pos -ma e ialis alues in wes e n libe al democ acies
SDO and RWA we e ini ially p oposed as pe sonali y ai s (Al emeye , 1998). Tha is, s able ea u es
consolida ed a ea ly s ages o indi idual de elopmen . Ingleha also ini ially p oposed ha basic alues,
ei he pos -ma e ialis o ma e ialis , a e consolida ed du ing indi iduals’ o ma i e yea s and ea ly
socializa ion s ages, and end o endu e he whole li e, he e o e becoming pe sonali y ai s. Acco ding
o him, his would explain why he ise o pos -ma e ialis alues ook place a a slow pace in wes e n
libe al democ acies, in he con ex o gene a ional eplacemen a e WWII (Ab amson and Ingleha ,
1995). None heless, mo e ecen ly, SDO and RWA. ha e been assumed o e lec a he social a i udes
(Ducki , 2015), and he e o e a e expec ed o be in luenced by socio-economic condi ions. Indeed, he
expe ience o h ea and ea can inc ease he le els o SDO and RWA in he sho - e m (Sibley e al.,
2007) and hence indi iduals pe cei ing economic o social unce ainly as well as physical o symbolic
h ea , migh apidly inc ease hei p e e ences o au ho i a ianism and he associa ed in e -g oup
p ejudices. This migh pa ly explain he ecen backslash o pos -ma e ialis alues in he U.S., esul ing
in he elec ion o Donald T ump (Ingleha and Mo is, 2017).
8
Based on he e idence aised by he social psychology li e a u e ( e iewed abo e), showing a ela ionship
be ween au ho i a ian social a i udes and he sense o exis en ial insecu i y, h ea and ea , we posi ha
he inc ease o he poli ical in luence o a - igh mo emen s in libe al democ acies is likely associa ed
wi h a ise in SDO and RWA among he popula ion. This hypo hesis has s ill o be empi ically
demons a ed in di e en wo ld egions. Resea ch using he SDO and RWA cons uc s has been mainly
conduc ed in he U.S. (wi h an o e - ep esen a ion o college s uden s in he samples) and longi udinal
s udies (assessing hese indica o s ac oss ime) a e scan ( o a ecen example see S anley e al., 2019).
The psychological ounda ions o au ho i a ianism associa ed wi h le -wing poli ical p e e ences ha e
conside ably been less in es iga ed, as compa ed o igh -wing au ho i a ianism (Conway e al., 2018).
This is a subjec ha dese es u he in es iga ion (being Venezuela and Nica agua ecen examples o
le -wing au ho i a ian d i s in democ a ic se ings).
Summa izing, he ising ‘ a - igh insu gency’ ac oss wo ld egions migh be an indica ion ha we a e
li ing an age o ea , a p oposi ion ha coincides wi h sociological in e p e a ions o con empo a y
capi alism (Bauman, 2006; Bo doni, 2017). The d i e s (causes) o his si ua ion may a y om place o
place, bu he expe ience o indigna ion, mis us and h ea seems o be a common ea u e. We posi ha
while he changes in socio-economic condi ions unde lying indi idual pe cep ion o exis en ial insecu i y
a e di e se, he eme gence and consolida ion o global communica ion and poli ical ne wo ks, enabled
by in o ma ion echnologies, is helping o shape, uni y and ein o ce a global a - igh poli ical
mo emen , oo ed in bo h au ho i a ian and an i-en i onmen alis poli ical p e e ences.
3.4. Au ho i a ianism and an i-en i onmen alism
The T ump and Bolsona o adminis a ions a e good examples o a a igh insu gency mo emen coming
o powe wi h bo h an au ho i a ian p o ile and a policy agenda ha dismisses impo an en i onmen al
issues, including hose ha ha e long been c a ed h ough mul ila e al agendas. They mime ically sha e
a numbe o an i-en i onmen al s ances, including in e -alia, a scep ic and e en denial posi ion on clima e
change, clea p e e ences o sho e m economic g ow h o e longe e m en i onmen al p o ec ion, he
belie ha cu en en i onmen al egula ions a e excessi e and de e en o economic p ospe i y,
opposi ion o indigenous igh s o e hei e i o ies, and an agg essi e a i ude owa ds en i onmen al
ac i is s and NGOs, who a e conside ed o be h ea s o he desi ed social o de .
The con empo a y associa ion be ween au ho i a ian and an i-en i onmen alis poli ical p e e ences,
e lec ed in he p o ile o he T ump and Bolsona o adminis a ions, migh ha e a psychological
ounda ion. Social psychology has ound a posi i e ela ionship be ween au ho i a ian and an i-
en i onmen al a i udes (S anley and Wilson, 2019). Empi ical e idence sugges s ha SDO is a good
9
de e minan o clima e change denial (Jylha and Ak ami, 2015), e en be e han sel -decla ed poli ical
o ien a ion (Hakkinen and Ac ami, 2014). The o e ep esen a ion o whi e conse a i e males among
clima e change denie s (McC igh and Dunlap, 2011; Bjonbe g e al., 2017) could pa ly be explained by
hei ela i ely highe le els o SDO (Jylha e al, 2016). Mil o e al. (2017) also ound ha SDO is
nega i ely ela ed o engagemen wi h en i onmen al ci izen ac ion and p o-en i onmen al beha iou
ac oss a wide ange o cul u al backg ounds. Simila ly, S anley e al. (2017b) epo ha indi iduals
e ealing highe le els o he SDO-dimension ‘in e g oup an i-egali a ism’ a e less likely o belie e in
an h opogenic clima e change and a e also less likely o alue en i onmen al p o ec ion, hus being less
willing o make consump ion sac i ices o he en i onmen . In ano he s udy, S anley e al. (2017a) also
show ha indi iduals who epo ed highe le els o RWA end o ha e lowe sco es o p o-en i onmen al
a i udes and highe le els o clima e change denial, wi h RWA being a s ong p edic o o en i onmen al
conce ns mo e gene ally.
The same psychological mechanisms ha explain how g oup-based social hie a chy is o med and
main ained (P a o e al., 1994) seem o be ela ed o an i-en i onmen al a i udes. Some poli ical
psychologis s p opose ha a hie a chical iew on human-na u e ela ions is in insically ela ed o he
suppo o social inequali y (Mil on e al., 2013; Mil on and Sibley, 2014). Psychological p e e ences
owa ds hie a chy and social domina ion migh hen explain bo h ole ance owa ds social injus ice and
en i onmen al des uc ion (Feygina, 2013), as domina ion and e en annihila ion o bo h unde p i ileged
social g oups and na u e is jus i ied by au ho i a ian wo ld iews. One o he con ibu ions o poli ical
psychology has been he social dominance heo y (P a o and S ewa d, 2012), which s esses he no ion
o ‘legi imizing my hs’. Tha is, compelling cul u al ideologies ha pe mea e wo ld iews and human
ela ions, and ha ame and legi imize di e en aspec s o he social s uc u e, including social and
human-na u e ela ions. My hs legi imizing human supe io i y is-a- is non-human species jus i y human
en i lemen o domina e na u e and ecosys ems, including ia p i a e owne ship on hem. This human-
na u e ela ional model is cha ac e ized by a pe cep ion o na u e as sepa a ed and subo dina ed o humans
and a sou ce o h ea , he eby in e ac ions wi h i being gene ally based on social no ms ha jus i y i s
app op ia ion, exploi a ion, and ul ima ely, i s des uc ion (Mu adian and Pascual, 2018).
4. The (sus ainabili y) science-policy in e ace unde pos - u h poli ics
4.1. The na u e o he science-policy in e ace
Ra ionali y is a high o de aspi a ion associa ed wi h policy making in wes e n libe al democ acies. The
assump ion ha scien i ic knowledge is a undamen al ing edien o he policy o mula ion p ocess is also
a co e ene o mode ni y (OECD, 2015), pa icula ly in ields cha ac e ised by a high deg ee o
complexi y as i is he case o he go e nance o social-ecological sys ems (Rose e al., 2017). Despi e
16
Came on, M. 2018. Making sense o compe i i e au ho i a ianism: Lessons om he Andes. La in
Ame ican Poli ics and Socie y 60 (2): 1-22.
Cas elli, P. and A. Pi o. The a igh as social mo emen ..Eu opean Socie ies (2018): 1-16.
Cas ells, M. 2018. Rup u e: The C isis o Libe al Democ acy. Poli y P ess. U.K. 176 pp.
Ça koğlu, A. and E. Kalaycıoğlu,. 2009. The ising ide o conse a ism in Tu key. Palg a e Mcmillan.
New Yo k. 173 pp.
Ca lson, M. 2018. The In o ma ion Poli ics o Jou nalism in a Pos -T u h Age. Jou nalism S udies 19
(13): 1879-1888.
Ca anza, B. and C. Da Cunha. 2018. Conse a i e eligious ac i ism in he B azilian Cong ess: Sexual
agendas in ocus. Social Compass. Doi.o g/10.1177/0037768618792810.
Casas-Co és, M. 2014. A Genealogy o p eca i y: A oolbox o ea icula ing agmen ed social eali ies
in and ou o he wo kplace. Re hinking Ma xism 26 (2): 206–226.
Conway, L., Houck, S., Go nick, L. and M. Repke. 2018. Finding he Loch Ness Mons e : Le -wing
au ho i a ianism in he Uni ed S a es. Poli ical Psychology 39 (5): 1049-1067.
Dhon , K. and G. Hodson. 2014. Why do igh -wing adhe en s engage in mo e animal exploi a ion and
mea consump ion. Pe sonali y and Indi idual Di e ences 64: 12-17.
Díaz-Re i iego, I., Tu nhou , E., & Beck, S. (2019). Pa icipa ion and inclusi eness in he
In e go e nmen al Science–Policy Pla o m on Biodi e si y and Ecosys em Se ices. Na u e
Sus ainabili y, 2: 457–464
Douglas, K., Su on, R. and A. Cichocka. 2017. The Psychology o Conspi acy Theo ies. Cu en
Di ec ions in Psychological Science 26 (6): 538 –542.
Ducki , J. 2015. Au ho i a ian Pe sonali y. In: W igh , J. (Ed), In e na ional Encyclopedia o he Social
and Beha io al Sciences,Vol 2. Ox o d. Else ie . 255–261 pp.
Ducki , J. and K. Fishe . 2003. The Impac o social h ea on wo ld iew and ideological a i udes.
Poli ical Psychology 24 (1): 199-222.
Duncan, L. and B. Pe e son. 2014. Au ho i a ianism, cogni i e igidi y, and he p ocessing o ambiguous
isual in o ma ion. Jou nal o Social Psychology 154: 480–490.
Feygina, I. 2013. Social Jus ice and he Human–En i onmen Rela ionship: Common Sys emic,
Ideological, and Psychological Roo s and P ocesses. Social Jus ice Resea ch 26:363–381.
Feldman, S. and K. S enne . 1997. Pe cei ed h ea and au ho i a ianism. Poli ical Psychology 18 (4):
741-770.
Foucaul , M. 2008. The Bi h o Poli ics: Lec u es a he Collége de F ance. Palg a e Macmillan. New
Yo k. 346 pp.
Hakkinen, K. and N. Ak ami. 2014. Ideology and clima e change denial. Pe sonali y and Indi idual
Di e ences 70: 62-65.
17
Hanssen, L., Rouwe e, E. and M. an Ka wijk. 2009. The Role o ecological science in en i onmen al
policy making: F om a paci ica ion owa d a acili a ion s a egy. Ecology and Socie y 14(1): 43.
h p://www.ecologyandsocie y.o g/ ol14/iss1/a 43.
Ha ambam, J., & Aupe s, S. (2015). Con es ing epis emic au ho i y: Conspi acy heo ies on he
bounda ies o science. Public Unde s anding o Science, 24(4), 466-480.
Hennes, E.,Nam, H., S e n, C. and J. Jos . 2012. No all ideologies a e c ea ed equal: Epis emic,
exis en ial, and ela ional needs p edic sys em-jus i ying a i udes. Social Cogni ion 30 (6): 669–688.
Higgings, K. 2016. Pos - u h: a guide o he pe plexed. Na u e 540: 9.
Hinze, T., Dos e , J. and V. Joe. 1997. The ela ionship o conse a ism and cogni i e-complexi y.
Pe sonali y and Indi idual Di e ences 22 (2): 297-298.
Ho, A., Sidanius,J., P a o, F., Le in, S., Thomsen, L., K eily, N. and J. Sheehy-Ske ing on. 2011.
Social Dominance O ien a ion: Re isi ing he s uc u e and unc ion o a a iable p edic ing social
and poli ical a i udes. Pe sonali y and Social Psychology Bulle in. DOI:
10.1177/0146167211432765.
Ingleha , R. 1977. The Silen Re olu ion: Changing Values and Poli ical S yles Among Wes e n
Publics. P ince on Uni e si y P ess. U.S. 482 pp.
Ingleha , R. 2000. Globaliza ion and Pos mode n Values. The Washing on Qua e ly. 23 (1): 215–228.
Ingleha , R. 2018. Cul u al E olu ion: People's Mo i a ions a e Changing, and Reshaping he Wo ld.
Camb idge Uni e si y P ess. U.K. 274 pp.
Ingleha , R. and P. No is. 2017. T ump and he Populis Au ho i a ian Pa ies: The Silen Re olu ion
in Re e se. Pe spec i es on Poli ics 15 (2): 443-454.
Iyenga , S. and D.S. Massey. 2018. Scien i ic communica ion in a pos - u h socie y. P oceedings o he
Na ional Academy o Sciences. doi/10.1073/pnas.1805868115.
Jessani, Z. and P. Ha is. 2018. Pe sonali y, poli ics, and denial: Tole ance o ambigui y, poli ical
o ien a ion and disbelie in clima e change. Pe sonali y and Indi idual Di e ences 131: 121-123.
Johns on, E. and C. Soulsby. 2006. The ole o science in en i onmen al policy: An examina ion o he
local con ex . Land Use Policy 23: 161-169.
Jos , J. 2017a. Asymme ies abound: Ideological di e ences in emo ion, pa isanship, mo i a ed
easoning, social ne wo k s uc u e and poli ical us . Jou nal o Consume Psychology 27 (4): 546-
553.
Jos , J. 2017b. Ideological Asymme ies and he Essence o Poli ical Psychology. Poli ical Psychology
38 (2): 167-208.
Jos , J., Ba be á, P., Bonneau, R., Lande , M., Me zge , M., Nagle , J, S e ling,J., Tucke , J. 2018a. How
Social Media Facili a es Poli ical P o es : In o ma ion, Mo i a ion, and Social Ne wo ks. Ad ances in
Poli ical Psychology 39 (1): 58-118.
Jos , J., Fede ico, C., and J. Napie . 2009. Poli ical ideology: I s s uc u e, unc ions and elec i e a fini ies.
Annual Re iew Psychology 60:307–37.
18
Jos , J., Lange , M., Badaan, V., Aze edo, F., E chezaha , E., Unga e i, J. and E. Hennes. 2017a. Ideology
and he limi s o sel -in e es : Sys em jus ifica ion mo i a ion and conse a i e ad an ages in mass
poli ics. T ansla ional Issues in Psychological Science 3(3): e1-e26.
Jos , J., Napie , J., Tho isdo i , H., Gosling, S., Pal ai, T. and B. Os a in. 2007b. A e needs o manage
unce ain y and h ea associa ed wi h poli ical conse a ism o ideological ex emi y? Pe sonali y and
Social Psychology Bulle in 33: 989-1007.
Jos , J., S e n, C., Rule, N. and J. S e ling. 2017c. The poli ics o ea : Is he e an ideological asymme y
in exis en ial mo i a ion. Social Cogni ion 35 (4): 324–353.
Jos , J., an de Linden, S., Panagopoulos, C. and C. Ha din. 2018b. Ideological asymme ies in
co o mi y, desi e o sha ed eali y, and he sp ead o misin o ma ion. Cu en Opinion in Psychology
23: 77-83.
Jø gensen, M. 2015. P eca ia – Wha i Is and Isn’ – Towa ds an Unde s anding o Wha i Does. C i ical
Sociology 1 –16.
Juge , P. and J. Ducki . 2009. A Mo i a ional Model o Au ho i a ianism: In eg a ing Pe sonal and
Si ua ional De e minan s. Poli ical Psychology 30 (5):693-719.
Jylha, K. and N. Ak ami. 2015. Social dominance o ien a ion and clima e change denial: The ole
dominance and sys em jus i ica ion. Pe sonali y and Indi idual Di e ences 86: 108-111.
Jylha, K., Can al, C., Ak ami, N. and T. Mil on . 2016. Denial o an h opologic clima e change: Social
dominance o ien a ion helps explain he conse a i e male e ec in B azil and Sweden. Pe sonali y
and Indi idual Di e ences 98: 184-187.
Kahan, D. 2015. Wha is he “science o science communica ion”? Jou nal o Science Communica ion
14 (03): DOI: 10.22323/2.14030404.
Kahan, D., Jenkins-Smi h, H. and D. B aman. 2011. Cul u al cogni ion o scien i ic consensus. Jou nal
o Risk Resea ch 14 (2): 147–174.
Kahan, D.,Pe e s, E., Wi lin, M., Slo ic, P., La imo e-Ouelle e, L., B aman, D., and G. Mandel. 2012.
The pola izing impac o science li e acy and nume acy on pe cei ed clima e change isks. Na u e
Clima e Change 2: 732-735.
Ken e , J. O. 2017. Delibe a i e mone a y alua ion. In Rou ledge Handbook o Ecological Economics
(pp. 351-361). Rou ledge.
Klayman, J. 1995. Va ie ies o con i ma ion bias. The Psychology o Lea ning and Mo i a ion 32: 385-
418.
Kopenawa, D. and B. A be . 2013. The Falling Sky: Wo ds o a Yanomami Shaman. Ha a d Uni e si y
P ess. Camb idge, Massachuse s. 621 pp.
Lannen A, Bie i S, Bade C. 2019. Inequali y: Wha ’s in a Wo d? CDE Policy B ie , No. 14. Be n,
Swi ze land: CDE.
Le i sky, S. and L. Way. 2002. Elec ions Wi hou Democ acy: The ise o compe i i e au ho i a ianism.
Jou nal o Democ acy 13 (2): 51-65.
19
Lewandowsky. S., Ecke , U and J. Cook. 2017. Beyond misin o ma ion: Unde s anding and coping wi h
he pos - u h e a. Jou nal o Applied Resea ch in Memo y and Cogni ion 6: 353-369.
Likens, G. 2010. The ole o science in decision making: does e idence‐based science d i e
en i onmen al policy? F on ie s in Ecology and he En i onmen 8 (6): e1-e9.
Lockie, S. (2017). Pos - u h poli ics and he social sciences. En i onmen al Sociology 3(1): 1-5.
Lubchenco, J. 2017. En i onmen al science in a pos ‐ u h wo ld. F on ie s in Ecology and he
En i onmen 15 (1): 3.
Lus ig, N.,Lopez-Cal a, L., O iz-Jua ez, E., Monga, C. 2016. Decons uc ing he Decline in Inequali y
in La in Ame ica. In: Basu, K. and J. S igli z (eds.). Inequali y and G ow h: Pa e ns and Policy.
Palg a e Mcmillan. New Yo k.
Machado, M. 2012. E angelicals and Poli ics in B azil: he Case o Rio de Janei o. Religion, S a e and
Socie y 40 (1): 69-91.
Main, T. 2018. The Rise o Al -Righ . Bookings Ins i u ion P ess. Washing on DC. 303 pp.
Ma shall, N., Adge , N., A wood, S., B own, K., C issman, C., C i ano ic, C., De Young, C., Gooch,
M.,James, C., Jessen, S., Johnson, D., Ma shall, P., Pa k, S., Wachen eld, D. and D. W igle. 2017.
Empi ically de i ed guidance o social scien is s o in luence en i onmen al policy. Plos One
DOI:10.1371/jou nal.pone.0171950.
Masquelie , C. 2018. Bou dieu, Foucaul and he poli ics o p eca i y. Dis ink ion 20 (2): 133-155.
Maxwell, S. 2018. Pe cei ed h ea o c ime, au ho i a ianism, and he ise o a populis p esiden in he
Philippines. In e na ional Jou nal o Compa a i e and Applied C iminal Jus ice. DOI:
10.1080/01924036.2018.1558084.
McC igh , A. and R. Dunlap. 2011. Cool dudes: The denial o clima e change among conse a i e whi e
males in he Uni ed S a es. Global En i onmen al Change 21: 1163-1172.
Milano ic, B. 2016. Global Inequali y: A New App oach o he Age o Globaliza ion. Ha a d
Uni e si y P ess. Camb idge, Massachuse s . 299 pp.
Mil on , T., Bain, P., Kashima, Y., Co al-Ve dugo,V., Pasquali, C., Johansson, L-O., Guan, Y., Gou eia,
Y., Ga ða sdo, R., Do on, G., Bilewicz, M., U sugi, A., A agones, J.I., S eg, L., Soland, M., Pa k, J.,
O o, S., Dema que, C., Wagne , C., Madsen,O.L., Lebede a, N., Gonza, N., Schul z, W.,, Saiz, J.,
Ku z, T., Gi o d, R., Ako ia, C., Sa iolidis, N., and G. Eina sdó i . 2017. On he Rela ion Be ween
Social Dominance O ien a ion and En i onmen alism: A 25-Na ion S udy. Social Psychological and
Pe sonali y Science. DOI: 10.1177/1948550617722832.
Mil on , T., Rich e , I., Sibley, C., Wilson, M. and R. Fische . 2013. En i onmen al consequences o he
desi e o domina e and be supe io . Pe sonali y and Social Psychology Bulle in. DOI:
10.1177/0146167213490805.
Mil on , T. and C. Sibley. 2014. The hie a chy en o cemen hypo hesis o en i onmen al explo a ion: A
social dominance pe spec i e. Jou nal o Expe imen al Social Psychology 55: 188-193.
20
Mu adian, R. and U. Pascual. 2018. A ypology o elemen a y o ms o human-na u e ela ions: A
con ibu ion o he alua ion deba e. Cu en Opinion in En i onmen al Sus ainabili y 35: 8-14.
Na ayan, A., Van de Weide, R., Cojoca u, A., Lakne , C., Redaelli, S., Mahle D., Ramasubbaiah, R.
and S. Thewissen. 2018. Fai P og ess? Economic Mobili y ac oss Gene a ions a ound he Wo ld.
Wol d Bank. Washing on. 289 pp.
Nail, P.,McG ego , I, D inkwa e , A., S eele, G., Thompson, A. 2009. Th ea causes libe als o hink like
conse a i es. Jou nal o Expe imen al Social Psychology 45: 901–907.
Na by, J. 1998. The Cosmic Se pen : DNA and he o igin o knowledge. Pu nam. New Yo k. 256 pp.
Nelson, M. and J. Vuce ich.2008. On Ad ocacy by En i onmen al Scien is s: Wha , Whe he , Why, and
How. Conse a ion Biology. 23(5), 1090-1101
OECD. 2015. Scien i ic Ad ice o Policy Making: The Role and Responsibili y o Expe Bodies and
Indi idual Scien is s. OECD. Pa is. 50 pp.
Os om, E., Sch oede , L. and S.G. Wynne. 1993. Ins i u ional Incen i es and Sus ainable De elopmen :
In as uc u e Policies in Pe spec i e. Boulde . Wes iew P ess. 288 pp.
Pe ig ew, T. 2017. Social Psychological Pe spec i es on T ump Suppo e s. Jou nal o Social and
Poli ical Psychology 5(1): 107–116.
Pielke, R. 2007. The Hones B oke : Making Sense o Science in Policy and Poli ics. Camb ige Uni e si y
P ess. 171 pp.
P a o, F, Sidanius, J., Le in, S. 2006. Social dominance heo y and he dynamics o in e g oup ela ions:
Taking s ock and looking o wa d. Eu opean Re iew o Social Psychology 17: 271-320.
P a o, F, Sidanius, J., S allwo h, L. and B. Malle. 1994. Social Dominance O ien a ion: A Pe sonali y
Va iable P edic ing Social and Poli ical A i udes. Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social Psychology 67
(4): 741-763.
P a o, F. and A. S ewa . 2012. Social Dominance Theo y. In; Ch is ie, D. (Ed). The Encyclopedia o
Peace Psychology. Blackwell Publishing.
Rose, D., Mukhe jee, N., Simmons, S., Tew, E., Robe son, R., Vad o , A., Doubleday, R. and W.
Su he land. 2017. Policy windows o he en i onmen : Tips o imp o ing he up ake o scien ific
knowledge. En i onmen al Science and Policy. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.en sci.2017.07.013.
Saba ie , P. A. 2007. Theo ies o he policy p ocess. Boulde . CO: Wes iew P ess. 343 pp.
Same , J., Bu ke, T., Golds ein, B. 2017. The T ump Adminis a ion and he En i onmen Heed he
Science. The New England Jou nal o Medicine 376 (12): 1182-1188.
Sa awi z, D. 2004. How science makes en i onmen al con o e sies wo se. En i onmen al Science &
Policy 7: 385–403.
Shoo , N., Fo d, C. and S. Boggs. 2017. Dange ous wo ld iew: A media o o he ela ion be ween disgus
sensi i i y and social conse a ism. Pe sonali y and Indi idual Di e ences 119: 252-261.
21
Sibley,. C. and J. Ducki . 2010. Pe sonali y Geneses o Au ho i a ianism: The Fo m and Func ion o
Openness o Expe ience. In: Funke, F, Pe zel, Th., Coh s, J. and J. Ducki (Eds.). Pe spec i es on
Au ho i a ianism. Wiesbaden: VS-Ve lag. 169-199 pp.
Skocpol, T and V. Williamson. Th e Tea Pa y and he Remaking o Republican Conse a ism. Ox o d
Uni e si y P ess. Ox o d. 245 pp.
Sø ensen, M and A. Ch is iansen. 2013. Ul ich Beck: An In oduc ion o he Theo y o Second Mode ni y
and Risk Socie y. Rou ledge. U.S. 181 pp.
Spash, C. 2017. En i onmen alism and democ acy in he age o na ionalism and co po a e capi alism.
En i onmen al Values 26(4): 403-412.
S anding, G. 2011. The P eca ia : The New Dange ous Class. Bloomsbu y Academic. London. 198 pp.
S anley, S., Mil on , T., Wilson, M., Sibley, C. 2019. The in luence o social dominance o ien a ion and
igh -wing au ho i a ianism on en i onmen alism: A i e-yea c oss-lagged analysis. PLoS ONE
14(7): e0219067. h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0219067.
S anley, S. and M. Wilson. 2019. Me a-analysing he associa ion be ween social dominance o ien a ion,
au ho i a ianism, and a i udes on he en i onmen and clima e change. Jou nal o En i onmen al
Psychology 61: 46-56.
S anley, S., Wilson, M. and T. Mil on . 2017a. Explo ing sho - e m longi udinal e ec s o igh -wing
au ho i a ianism and social dominance o ien a ion on en i onmen alism. Pe sonali y and Indi idual
Di e ences 108: 174-177.
S anley, S., Wilson, M., Sibley, C. and T. Mil on . 2017b. Dimensions o social dominance and hei
associa ion wi h en i onmen alism. Pe sonali y and Indi idual Di e ences 107: 228-236.
S uhle , J. 2018. A Re iew o In e gene a ional Mobili y and i s D i e s. Technical epo by he Join
Resea ch Cen e. Eu opean Union. Luxembou g. 44 pp.
Tu nhou , E., Dewul , A. & Hulme, M. Wha does policy- ele an global en i onmen al knowledge do?
The cases o clima e and biodi e si y. Cu . Opin. En i on. Sus ain. 18, 65–72 (2016).
an P ooijen, J-W. and K. Douglas. 2017. Conspi acy heo ies as pa o his o y: The ole o socie al
c isis si ua ions. Memo y S udies 10 (3): 323 –333.
Weible, C., Heikkila, T., deLeon, P., and P. Saba ie . 2012. Unde s anding and in luencing he policy
p ocess. Policy Sciences 45(1). Doi:10.1007/s11077-011-9143-5
Weiss, C. 1977. Resea ch o Policy's Sake: The Enligh enmen Func ion o Social Resea ch. Policy
Analysis 3(4): 531-545.
Webb, E. 1998. E nes Becke and he psychology o wo ld iews. Zygon 33 (1): 71-86.
Whi ley, B. and S. Lee. 2000. The Rela ionship o Au ho i a ianism and Rela ed Cons uc s o A i udes
Towa d Homosexuali y. Jou nal o Applied Social Psychology 30 (1): 144-170.
Wilson, M. and C. Sibley. 2013. Social Dominance O ien a ion and Righ -Wing Au ho i a ianism:
Addi i e and In e ac i e E ec s on Poli ical Conse a ism. Poli ical Psychology 34 (2): 277-284.
22
Zog a os, C. 2015. Value Delibe a ion in Ecological Economics. Handbook o Ecological Economics,
74-99
