Political Drivers of Air Pollution in the U.S.: A Time-Series

Analysis (1959-1998)

A.C. McCreery

The Ohio State University

Outline

OverviewTheory &

HypothesesData & MethodsResultsDiscussion

Overview

Political factors that lead to changes over time in the ecological impact of U.S. society, focusing on air pollution

Influential factors:Political ProcessesMedia attentionPublic policy

Contributions

Previous research has addressed:The effect of policyEconomic theories

Previous research as not addressed:The role of the environmental movementPolitical agenda settingDrivers of different pollutants

Air Pollution

3 measures of air pollution, based on EPA criteria pollutants:Index of Sulfur dioxide (SO2), Carbon Monoxide

(CO), and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.904

Nitrogen OxidesParticulate Matter smaller than 10 micrometers

Air Pollution Trends

Driving Factors

Political ProcessesThe environmental movementPolitical opportunities for the movement

Political Agenda-SettingMedia attention

Policy & ImplementationQuality of policyEnforcement/implementation of policy

Political Processes

Political ContextPresence of Allies: Democrats in fed. gov’tWeak opposition: business interests

Organizational resources: environmental movement actions

Political Agenda

Congressional hearings on the environmentAct as political openings

Media AttentionProvides legitimacy &

saliencePlaces the environment

on the political agenda

Policy & Implementation

Strength of policyImplementation of policy

Policy implementation influenced by:environmental movementpolitical opportunitiesmedia

Measurement of Policy

Coded federal legislation1 on 3 criteria:Enforcement powers (weighted double the other 2

criteria)Scope (broad or narrow)Whether $ was earmarked into the bill

Clean Air Act and Amendments coded separately and weighted higher

Yearly policy = positive laws - negative laws

1 Reitze, Arnold W. 2001. Air Pollution Control Law: Compliance and Enforcement. Washington D.C.: The Environmental Law Institute.

Methodology

All variables first-differenced to detrend, and IVs lagged 1 year

OLS regression with base variablesInteraction analyses, with 1 interaction

per regression

Very conservative model, with possible Type II errors

Results: Index of SO2 CO & VOCs

Base Variables Coefficient

Real GDP / capita 153.90

Real GDP / Capita, squared -276384

Democratic Unity -0.073

Congressional Hearings (Logged)

9.79 E-04

Corporate Taxes -1.66 E-02

Media Attention (Logged) -6.18 E-04 *

Air Pollution Policy -3.64 E-03

Implementation Funding 0.320

Movement Actions 3.72 E-03

Constant -6.106

Adjusted R-squared 0.110

Durbin-Watson D-statistic 1.705

n = 38

*** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05; one-tailed

Results: NOx

Base Variables Coefficient

Real GDP / capita 102.45 *

Real GDP / Capita, squared -207073 **

GDP & GDP squared F-Test for joint significance (P > F)

**

Democratic Unity -0.038

Congressional Hearings (Logged) 5.94 E-04

Corporate Taxes 1.16 E-03

Media Attention (Logged) -2.05 E-04 *

Air Pollution Policy -3.93 E-03

Implementation Funding 0.080

Movement Actions 1.88 E-03

Constant -1.436

Adjusted R-squared 0.470

Durbin-Watson D-statistic 1.618

n = 38

*** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05; one-tailed

Results: NOx Interactions

Interaction Variable Coef.

Adjusted R2

Main Effects Coef.

Movement actions * Air Pollution Policy

-4.30 E-04 ** 0.560 Movement Actions

2.15 E-03 aa

Air Pollution Policy

-3.04 E-03

Movement actions * Democratic Unity

-2.51 E-03 * 0.512 Movement Actions

1.44 E-03 a

Democratic Unity

-5.18 E-02

*** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05; one-tailedaaa p < 0.001, aa p < 0.01, a p < 0.05; two-tailed.

NOx Explanatory Power

Results: PM-10

Base Variables Coefficient

Real GDP / capita 60.92

Real GDP / Capita, squared -134973 *

GDP & GDP squared F-Test for joint significance (P > F)

Democratic Unity 0.030

Congressional Hearings (Logged) 2.55 E-04

Corporate Taxes 8.81 E-04

Media Attention (Logged) -1.96 E-04 *

Air Pollution Policy -4.40 E-03

Implementation Funding 0.184

Movement Actions 5.96 E-04

Constant -3.555 *

Adjusted R-squared 0.198

Durbin-Watson D-statistic 1.762

n = 38

*** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05; one-tailed

Results: PM-10 Interactions

Interaction Variable Coef.

Adjusted R2

Main Effects Coef.

Movement actions * Media Attention

-7.09 E-06 ** 0.330 Movement Actions

1.12 E-03

Media Attention

-4.85 E-05

*** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05; one-tailed

PM-10 Explanatory Power

Significant Effects

Media Attention

Air Pollution Policy

Environmental Movement Actions

Democratic Unity

NOx Emissions

-

-

+

+

Significant Effects

Media Attention

Environmental Movement Actions

PM-10 Emissions-

Index Emissions(SO2, CO, &VOCs)Media Attention

-

Conclusions

Media Attention & the Political Agenda

Environmental movement must rely on political opportunities to be effective

Results not generalizeable across pollutants

Acknowledgements

Colleagues

Dr. J. Craig Jenkins

Dr. Robert Brulle

Dr. Jon Agnone

Funding & Resources

Ohio State University Dept. of Sociology

Ohio State University Environmental Science Graduate Program

The Fay Graduate Fellowship Fund in Environmental Sciences

NSF Grant #SES-0455215, “Civil Society & the Environment”