Not all individuals keep coherent attitudes toward climate change. Some citizens express high concern about the phenomenon but are unwilling to support mitigation policies, a discrepancy known as the concern-policy support gap. But, under what conditions can this gap be reduced? The literature on extreme weather events often overlooks the nature of the phenomenon, particularly its visibility. While it is impossible to reproduce such events, citizens can be prompted to recall a specific climatic event through experimental framing. Using a survey experiment, this study examines how different framings affect individuals’ climate attitudes, mediated by their perception of the event. Phenomena such as heavy rainfall or floods, which involve visible damages, a clear attribution to climate change, high media coverage, and subsequent state intervention, elicit responses distinct from heatwaves or droughts, whose effects are less visible and receive lower attention. It is expected that individuals framed with high public-salience events will exhibit greater willingness to accept mitigation policies, whereas those recalling low public-salience events will show heightened climate concern, in both cases relative to those not exposed to framing. Consequently, the concern-policy support gap is reduced in the first scenario but not in the second.

Climate change mitigation policies are increasingly prevalent, yet many citizens, despite expressing concern about climate change, demonstrate resistance to accepting such measures. How can these climate attitudes be aligned? Drawing upon the literature on belief systems and external climate shocks, it is posited that individuals with greater exposure to climate change-related phenomena will exhibit more coherent attitudes than those less affected. However, exogenous factors are not solely responsible for aligning climate change concern with the predisposition to accept mitigation measures; the cost associated with a given policy is also crucial. To test these arguments, a longitudinal survey on the climate attitudes of the Spanish population, encompassing both concern and willingness to accept mitigation measures, was used. The findings of this research indicate that exogenous shocks influence the coherence of individual attitudes. Nevertheless, it is essential to consider the cost that such policies impose on citizens. Furthermore, it is observed that individuals on the political right are less sensitive to these external climate phenomena and, consequently, exhibit a lesser reduction in the concern-policy support gap.

Why are some citizens concerned about climate change but not willing to accept actions to mitigate it? Using the literature on value and belief systems and policy incoherence, a theory is developed to explain the main factors that determine whether people are consistent in their attitudes towards climate change. This article attempts to explain the determinants of the ‘concern-policy support gap’, which is a gap between being concerned about climate change but not supporting certain policies to mitigate the problem. Climate change has been chosen because it is a relevant issue that is inevitable in the medium term and may lead to certain crises of legitimacy and democratic quality, as there is a disconnection between public opinion and the policies that are implemented. Certain factors are expected to diminish this gap, such as values, personal experience, available information and skills, and ideological polarization. The existence of ideologically aligned values will lead to a smaller gap than the existence of mixed values. But in the presence of mixed values, the aforementioned factors will decrease the existing gap. To test whether these factors narrow the gap, data from the European Social Survey are used for several individual countries on questions related to different mitigation policies (increasing fuel taxes, banning inefficient appliances and subsidizing renewable energy) and concern about climate change in general. Questions relating to self-identification values, being affected by climate disasters, and the amount of information and ideological polarization of a party system are also available. With these data, and controlling for classical socio-demographic variables, the aim is to understand how these factors decrease the concern-policy support gap. This research aims to contribute to the literature on opinion formation, democratic quality and public opinion on climate change and the acceptance of mitigation policies.