The online survey of representative national samples also shows that belief in man-made climate change has reached the highest level in the United States since 2009, and has fallen considerably in Britain.

Overall, half of Canadians (52%, -8 since October) and Americans (49%, +7) say that that global warming is a fact and is mostly caused by emissions from vehicles and industrial facilities. Only 43 per cent of Britons (-4) agree with this assessment.

In the United States, one-in-five respondents (20%, -5) think that global warming is a theory that has not yet been proven, along with 20 per cent of Britons (+2) and 14 per cent of Canadians (=).

More than half of Canadians (55%, -6) believe it is more important to protect the environment, even at the risk of hampering economic growth, while 22 per cent (+4) would prefer to foster economic growth, even at the risk of damaging the environment.

In the United States, 47 per cent of respondents (+2) would emphasize protecting the environment, while 26 per cent (-4) would foster economic growth. The biggest change since last year comes in Britain, where only 40 per cent of respondents would protect the environment (-11) and 33 per cent would prefer to foster economic growth (+11).

Analysis

Since 2009, Angus Reid Public Opinion has conducted five three-country surveys on global warming. The latest poll outlines one of the lowest proportions of believers in man-made climate change ever recorded in Canada (52%). Still, Canadians are more likely than Americans or Britons to both believe in emissions as the primary source of global warming and to choose environmental protection over economic growth.

In the United States, despite the economic crisis, belief in man-made global warming has reached the high level that was observed before the so-called “climate-gate” controversy. In addition, the proportion of Americans who brand climate change as an unproven theory fell by five points, the biggest fluctuation observed in the past three years.

Britain has become the main source of skepticism, with the lowest proportion of believers in man-made global warming, and with a third of Britons acknowledging that they would foster economic growth even at the risk of damaging the environment—the largest proportion observed in all three countries.

Full Report, Detailed Tables and Methodology (PDF)

CONTACT:

Mario Canseco, Vice President, Angus Reid Public Opinion
+877 730 3570
mario.canseco@angus-reid.com

Methodology: From August 25 to September 2, 2010 Angus Reid Public Opinion conducted an online survey among 1,001 Canadian adults who are Angus Reid Forum panellists, 1,000 American adults who are Springboard America panellists, and 2,005 British adults who are Springboard UK panellists. The margin of error—which measures sampling variability—is +/- 3.1% for Canada and the United States, and 2.2 per cent for Great Britain. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure samples representative of the entire adult population of Canada, the U.S. and Great Britain. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding.

In the online survey of a representative sample of 1,005 American adults, 68 per cent of respondents acknowledge that recent price increases in gasoline have caused financial hardship for themselves and others in their household.

Respondents in the South (71%) appear to be the most affected, followed by those in the Midwest (68%), the West (67%) and the Northeast (63%).

When asked if they have taken any measures to deal with recent gas price increases, seven-in-ten Americans (69%) say they are driving less than usual, while two-in-five (38%) are filling up their cars with less fuel than they would normally do.

One-in-five Americans (20%) are walking to destinations more often than they used to, while fewer respondents are choosing to carpool more (12%) or take public transit (10%).

Across the country, five per cent of Americans say they have sold their car to buy a more fuel efficient vehicle. This course of action is more prevalent among respondents aged 18-to-34 (7%) and people in the West (8%).

Full Report, Detailed Tables and Methodology (PDF)

CONTACT:

Mario Canseco, Vice President, Angus Reid Public Opinion
+877 730 3570
mario.canseco@angus-reid.com

Methodology: From August 4 to August 5, 2010, Angus Reid Public Opinion conducted an online survey among 1,005 American adults who are Springboard America panelists. The margin of error—which measures sampling variability—is +/- 3.1%. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure a sample representative of the entire adult population of the United States. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding.

The considerable level of uncertainty that Britons expressed earlier this year towards global warming has subsided, as more people in the country regard climate change as a fact, a new three-country Angus Reid Public Opinion poll has found.

The online survey of representative national samples also shows that Canadians continue to lead the way in the belief that global warming is caused by emissions, while Americans remain particularly doubtful.

Overall, three-in-five Canadians (60%, +2 since April) say that that global warming is a fact and is mostly caused by emissions from vehicles and industrial facilities. This month, 47 per cent of Britons agree with this assessment, up nine points in six months. Americans are the most skeptical at 42 per cent (+1).

In the United States, a quarter of respondents (25%, unchanged) believe global warming is a theory that has not yet been proven, along with 18 per cent of Britons (-9) and 14 per cent of Canadians (-4).

Three-in-five Canadians (61%) think it is more important to protect the environment, even at the risk of hampering economic growth, while 18 per cent would prefer to foster economic growth, even at the risk of damaging the environment.

Half of Britons would rather protect the environment (51%) than foster economic growth (22%). The views of Americans are more nuanced on this issue (45% to 30%).

Analysis

Canadians went through a period of global warming disbelief at the end of 2009, when the proportion of respondents who saw climate change as a fact mostly caused by emissions fell by 11 points. Now, Canadians are closer to their pre-Copenhagen summit numbers.

In stark contrast, the views of Americans have not recovered since last year’s plunge. Twice in 2010, a quarter of respondents have branded climate change as an unproven theory—six points higher than in November 2009.

In Britain, the conclusion of the so-called “climate-gate” has left opinions about global warming at roughly the same levels as before the controversy first began. The big drop experienced in April has dissipated, and Britons are now closer to Canadians on this issue.

Full Report, Detailed Tables and Methodology (PDF)

CONTACT:

Mario Canseco, Vice President, Communications & Media Relations
+877 730 3570
mario.canseco@angus-reid.com

Methodology: From October 4 to October 17, 2010 Angus Reid Public Opinion conducted an online survey among 1,009 Canadian adults who are Angus Reid Forum panellists, 1,003 American adults who are Springboard America panellists, and 1,948 British adults who are Springboard UK panellists. The margin of error—which measures sampling variability—is +/- 3.1% for Canada and the United States, and 2.2 per cent for Great Britain. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure samples representative of the entire adult population of Canada, the US and Great Britain. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding.

A three-country Angus Reid Public Opinion poll has found that a campaign designed to link Alberta’s oil sands with damaging environmental practices could have a devastating impact on the province’s brand and tourism industry.

The online survey of representative national samples of 1,012 Canadian, 1,013 American, and 1,956 British adults sought to gauge public reaction to the “Rethink Alberta” campaign, which was launched last month by environmental groups and includes an online video, a website and billboards.

At the start of the survey, 49 per cent of Americans and 54 per cent of Britons said they would “definitely” or “probably” consider visiting Alberta if they were planning a holiday today.

However, after respondents were shown the 1:40 minute ad that “Rethink Alberta” has posted on YouTube, the perceptions of Americans and Britons clearly soured.

After watching the ad, only 26 per cent of Americans and 24 per cent of Britons would still “definitely” or “probably” consider travelling to Alberta. In fact, the proportion of those who would “definitely not” plan a holiday in Alberta increased from 15 per cent to 34 per cent among American respondents, and from 12 per cent to 31 per cent among British respondents.

Assessment of the Ad

Respondents in the three countries were asked to choose up to four adjectives to describe the online video.

In Canada, only five per cent of Albertans say the ad is fair but over a fifth of respondents in all other provinces—including 36 per cent in Ontario—describe it as fair. For Albertans, the ad is mostly deceiving (79%), unfair (67%), offensive (60%), and untrue (45%).

Over seven-in-ten respondents in the U.S., including 80 per cent in the South and 79 per cent in the Northeast, say the ad is informative. More than a third of Americans—including 46 per cent in the South—call it honest.

In Britain, at least three-in-ten respondents (40% in Scotland) think the ad is truthful and, just like in the U.S., a very large majority of respondents (at least 73%) deem it informative. London holds the highest proportion of respondents who describe the video as unfair (still quite low at 17%).

Oil Sands and the Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill

After watching the ad, Canadians are reticent to agree with the allegation that the environmental impact of Alberta’s oil industry is actually worse than the environmental impact of the recent oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. While only 27 per cent of Canadians agree with this statement—made last month by Michael Marx of Corporate Ethics International—two-in-five Americans (43%) and Britons (42%) do agree with the notion that Alberta’s oil industry is damaging the environment in a greater way than the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

The ad that was shown to survey respondents can be seen here.

Full Report, Detailed Tables and Methodology (PDF)

CONTACT:

Mario Canseco, Vice President, Public Affairs
+877 730 3570
mario.canseco@angus-reid.com

Methodology: From July 22 to August 1, 2010, Angus Reid Public Opinion conducted an online survey among 1,012 randomly selected Canadian adults who are Angus Reid Forum panelists; 1,013 American adults who are Springboard America panelists; and 1,956 British adults who are Springboard UK panelists. The margin of error—which measures sampling variability—is +/- 3.1% in Canada and the U.S., and 2.2% in Britain. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure a sample representative of the entire adult population of the three countries. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding.

Mario Canseco comments on the findings for CBC News.

In the United States, 53 per cent of respondents think the federal administration is not paying enough attention to the environment. In Britain, 40 per cent of respondents feel the same way about their government.

The G8 was created after the 1998 Birmingham summit. Russia had attended previous meetings of the G7, but had been excluded from specific discussions on financial and economic matters. The group holds annual summits where the heads of government of Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United States discuss economic and political affairs. The European Union (EU) also attends these meetings as an observer. The G20, which incorporates finance ministers and central bank governors from 19 countries and the EU, meets twice a year.

The latest G8 summit took place on Jun. 25 and Jun. 26 in Huntsville, Ontario (Canada), and the G20 meeting was held in Toronto on Jun. 26 and Jun. 27.

Late last month, executive director of Greenpeace USA Phil Radford expressed dismay at the way the G20 countries dealt with the environment, saying, "It is like a meal where you ask your friends to come and bring a dish. Some countries came with things that were half-baked. Some countries like Canada came with food that was rotten and then others showed up with nothing at all."

Polling Data

Canada – Overall, do you think the federal government is paying too much attention, the right amount of attention, or too little attention to the environment?

United States – Overall, do you think the federal government is paying too much attention, the right amount of attention, or too little attention to the environment?

Britian – Overall, do you think the Government is paying too much attention, the right amount of attention, or too little attention to the environment?

Complete Poll (PDF)

Most people in Canada and the United States believe their respective federal administrations are not paying enough attention to the environment, while Britons are more likely to endorse the way their government is handling this file, a new Angus Reid Public Opinion poll has found.

The online survey of representative samples of 1,002 Americans, 1,009 Canadians and 2,011 Britons also finds that global warming is not one of the most important environmental problems for respondents in the United States and Britain.

Governments

In Canada, two-thirds of respondents (66%) think their federal government is paying too little attention to the environment, while one-in-five (21%) believe it has taken the right approach, and just five per cent say it is paying too much attention to the this issue.

In the United States, a majority of respondents (53%) feel that their federal administration is not paying enough attention to the environment, while 19 per cent agree with the way this file has been handled, and 15 per cent claim that too much attention is being paid to the environment at this time.

In Britain, a third of respondents (34%) believe the government has taken the correct course of action on the environment, 11 per cent think too much attention has been paid to this topic, and 40 per cent believe more should be done.

Environmental Concerns

Respondents in the three countries were presented with a list of ten environmental problems, and asked to state whether they are personally concerned about each one of them.

Canadians and Americans place the same four issues as their biggest environmental concerns: the pollution of rivers lakes and reservoirs (Can. 80%, U.S. 72%), the contamination of soil and water by toxic waste (Can. 76%, U.S. 66%), the pollution of drinking water (Can. 72%, U.S. 70%), and air pollution (Can. 70%, U.S. 65%).

In Britain, a large proportion of respondents are also worried about the pollution of rivers lakes and reservoirs (62%) and air pollution (60%), but four different issues emerge as concerns for Britons: deforestation (67%), the loss of tropical rain forests (66%), the extinction of plant and animal species (61%), and the depletion of fish stocks due to overfishing (60%).

A majority of respondents in the three countries are worried about the maintenance of the supply of fresh water for household needs (Can. 60%, U.S. 56%. Bri. 54%).

Global warming or climate change is last on the list of environmental concerns for Britons (52%) and next-to-last for Americans (50%, slightly above the depletion of fish stocks through overfishing). Three-in-five Canadians (61%) are personally concerned about global warming.

While only three per cent of Canadians say they are not personally worried about any of the ten environmental problems reviewed on the survey, the proportion stands at nine per cent in Britain and 10 per cent in the United States.

Country-by-Country

In Canada, British Columbians (63%) and Quebecers (63%) are more likely to voice concerns over global warming than Ontarians (41%) and Albertans (40%). BC residents are particularly troubled by the depletion of fish stocks due to overfishing (76%) and deforestation (71%), while Ontarians are more concerned over the pollution of rivers, lakes and reservoirs (87%).

In the United States, respondents in the Northeast are more troubled by each one of the ten environmental problems than the national average. Only half of respondents in the Midwest, South and West are personally concerned about global warming and the extinction of plant and animal species.

In Britain, nine of the ten environmental problems are particularly important in the South of England. Global warming is the exception, and only half of respondents in the Midlands and Wales and the North are worried about this issue.

Full Report, Detailed Tables and Methodology (PDF)

CONTACT:

Mario Canseco, Vice President, Public Affairs
+877 730 3570
mario.canseco@angus-reid.com

Methodology: From July 1 to July 9, 2010, Angus Reid Public Opinion conducted an online survey among 1,009 Canadian adults who are Angus Reid Forum panellists, 1,002 American adults who are Springboard America panellists, and 2,011 British adults who are Springboard UK panellists. The margin of error—which measures sampling variability—is +/- 3.1% for Canada and the United States, and 2.2 per cent for Great Britain. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure samples representative of the entire adult population of Canada, the US and Great Britain. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding.

The Oil Pollution Act was passed by Congress in 1990 to mitigate and prevent civil liability for future oil spills off the U.S. coast. The act establishes that "holders of leases or permits for offshore facilities, except deepwater ports, are liable for up to $75 million per spill, plus removal costs."

On Apr. 20, a blowout at an oil well owned by BP Plc and located southeast of the Louisiana coast in the Gulf of Mexico caused a major oil spill which is now considered the largest in U.S. history. All attempts aimed at containing the oil spill have failed.

On May 28, U.S. president Barack Obama discussed the situation, saying, "BP is the responsible party for this disaster. What that means is they’re legally responsible for stopping the leak and they’re financially responsible for the enormous damage that they’ve created. And we’re going to hold them accountable, along with any other party responsible for the initial explosion and loss of life on that platform."

Polling Data

The Oil Pollution Act was passed by Congress in 1990 to mitigate and prevent civil liability for future oil spills off the U.S. coast. The act establishes that "holders of leases or permits for offshore facilities, except deepwater ports, are liable for up to $75 million per spill, plus removal costs." Do you support or oppose Congress raising the $75 million cap on damages under the Oil Pollution Act?

Complete Poll (PDF)

On the other hand, 30 per cent of respondents side with the government when it says that carbon must be priced for there to be enough incentives to reduce harmful emissions. Conversely, 45 per cent of respondents agree with the opposition’s idea that this way of thinking conceals the goal to implement a new tax.

Australia held a federal election in November 2007. Final results gave the Australian Labor Party (ALP) 85 seats in the 150-member House of Representatives. ALP leader Kevin Rudd was officially sworn in as prime minister in December, bringing an end to the 11-year tenure of Liberal leader John Howard as head of Australia’s government.

Howard failed to retain his seat in the Bennelong constituency and stepped down as Liberal leader. Since their electoral defeat in 2007, the Liberals have had three different leaders: former defence minister Brendan Nelson, former environment minister Malcolm Turnbull, and former health minister Abbott, who defeated Turnbull in an internal leadership ballot by just one vote in December 2009.

Abbott opposes a government-sponsored plan to create a carbon Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). On Jan. 15, the opposition leader proposed the creation of a 15,000-strong "green army," at a cost of about $625 million U.S. a year, to work on large environmental projects. Abbott declared: "The political left shouldn’t be seen as owning the environment—it is too important for that—and I am determined to challenge any assumption that it does."

Polling Data

The opposition leader Tony Abbott recently announced a plan to employ 15,000 people at an annual cost of up to $750 million to work on large scale environmental projects. Do you support or oppose this plan?

The federal government says placing a price on carbon is crucial to addressing climate change as there must be a strong incentive to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across all sectors to achieve the cuts necessary. The opposition says the Government’s plan to include a price on carbon as part of its proposed emissions trading scheme is nothing more than a new tax. Do you agree more with the government or more with the opposition?

Source: Essential Research
Methodology: Online interviews with 1,128 Australian adults, conducted from Jan. 18 to Jan. 24, 2010. No margin of error was provided.

The term global warming refers to an increase of the Earth’s average temperature. Some theories say that climate change might be the result of human-generated carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. In 2007, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a report which states that global warming has been "very likely"—or 90 per cent certain—caused by humans burning fossil fuels.

In 1998, several countries agreed to the Kyoto Protocol, a proposed amendment to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The agreement commits nations to reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

The Copenhagen Climate Change Summit took place from Dec. 7 to Dec. 18, 2009. Countries attending the summit were supposed to draft a new agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol, which is due to expire in 2012.

The final version of the Copenhagen Accord—which is not legally binding—includes pledges by signatories to hold the increase in global temperatures below two degrees Celsius, create a fund to help poor nations adapt to climate change that will grow to $100 billion U.S. annually by 2020, and aim to reduce worldwide emissions by 50 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020.

On Dec. 18, U.S. president Barack Obama discussed the importance of the deal, saying, "It is still going to require more work and more confidence-building and greater trust between emerging countries, the least developed countries, and the developed countries before I think you are going to see another legally binding treaty signed. I actually think that it’s necessary for us ultimately to get to such a treaty, and I am supportive of such efforts. But this is a classic example of a situation where if we just waited for that, then we would not make any progress."

Polling Data

Do you think the Copenhagen Accord will become a legally binding treaty in the future?

Source: Angus Reid Public Opinion
Methodology: Online interviews with 1,005 American adults, 1,013 Canadian adults, and 2,002 British adults, conducted from Dec. 22 and Dec. 23, 2009. Margins of error range from 2.2 per cent to 3.1 per cent.

Complete Poll – USA (PDF)

Complete Poll – BRI (PDF)

Complete Poll – CAN (PDF)

Conversely, 22 per cent of Americans believe global warming is happening but is mostly caused by natural changes, and 23 per cent think global warming is a theory that has not yet been proven.

The term global warming refers to an increase of the Earth’s average temperature. Some theories say that climate change might be the result of human-generated carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. In 2007, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a report which states that global warming has been "very likely"—or 90 per cent certain—caused by humans burning fossil fuels.

In 1998, several countries agreed to the Kyoto Protocol, a proposed amendment to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The agreement commits nations to reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. The U.S. has not ratified the treaty, which is due to expire in 2012.

In October 2007, former U.S. vice-president Al Gore and the IPCC were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize "for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change."

The Copenhagen Climate Change Summit is scheduled to end on Dec. 18. Countries attending the summit are supposed to draft a new agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol. U.S. president Barack Obama has said he will attend the summit.

On Dec. 14, Gore discussed the findings of new scientific work conducted at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School, declaring, "Some of the models suggest that there is a 75 per cent chance that the entire north polar ice cap during some of the summer months will be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years."

Polling Data

Which of the following statements comes closest to your view of global warming (or climate change)?

Source: Angus Reid Public Opinion
Methodology: Online interviews with 1,001 American adults, conducted on Dec. 8 and Dec. 9, 2009. Margin of error is 3.1 per cent.

Complete Poll (PDF)