NBER：气候两极分化与绿色投资（英）

NBER WORKING PAPER SERIESCLIMATE POLARIZATION AND GREEN INVESTMENTAnders AndersonDavid T. RobinsonWorking Paper 32131http://www.nber.org/papers/w32131NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH1050 Massachusetts AvenueCambridge, MA 02138February 2024We thank Marcus Opp, Philipp Krueger and seminar participants at the Stockholm School of Economics, University of Florida, Purdue University, the ZEW conference on Aging and Sustainable Finance and the AFBC Sydney for comments. We are grateful to Eline Jacobs and Ajitha Duvvuri for excellent research assistance and Vinnova, Mistra Financial Systems, the Nasdaq Nordic Foundation and the Jan Wallander and Tom Hedelius Foundation for research funding. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research.NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.© 2024 by Anders Anderson and David T. Robinson. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source.Climate Polarization and Green InvestmentAnders Anderson and David T. RobinsonNBER Working Paper No. 32131February 2024JEL No. G40,G51,G53,Q54ABSTRACTWe build a nationally representative sample of retirement savers in Sweden to study how asymmetric updating of beliefs about climate change affects investment decisions. After the intense heat wave of 2018, respondents in regions dominated by a right-wing, anti-climate party grow less concerned about climate change, while respondents outside these regions grow more concerned. Those growing more concerned rebalance their retirement portfolios toward climate-friendly mutual funds; those growing less concerned rebalance out of these funds, but to a smaller degree. Financial sophistication and inertia interacts with political polarization in driving these effects.Anders AndersonStockholm School of EconomicsDrottninggatan 98Stockholm, SwedenAnders.Anderson@hhs.seDavid T. RobinsonFuqua School of BusinessDuke University100 Fuqua DriveDurham, NC 27708and NBERdavidr@duke.edu1IntroductionWhen faced with a range of disparate facts potentially open to interpretation, experi-mental evidence shows that individuals asymmetrically update their beliefs. They attachmore weight to information that conforms to their priors and down-weight evidence thatconflicts with their priors, leading to increasing polarization of opinion.1 This is espe-cially important in the context of climate change, where individuals with opposing priorsroutinely confront a range of information subject to interpretation. For example, Sunsteinet al (2017) show that respondents who are initially skeptical about anthropogenic climatechange attach more weight to unexpected good news about clima