Australians are divided over who should pay for insurance premiums that are surging as a result of climate change, according to a new survey report by Charles Stuart University of Australia.
The national public opinion survey was conducted to explore how Australians think about and respond to life on a warming planet. It focusses on Australians’ attitudes about climate change .
The findings reveal that respondents are divided, with half of them supporting a levy on carbon-polluting industries to fund rising home insurance premiums in disaster-prone areas. But there is an across-the-board agreement that insurance companies are using extreme weather events as an excuse to raise home insurance premiums excessively.
Around 2,000 Australians participated in the survey that was developed and commissioned by Charles Sturt University Professor of Public Ethics Clive Hamilton, and carried out by public opinion company Roy Morgan Research.
Professor Hamilton said, “The results signal a deep-seated distrust of a major financial institution. Home insurance has become framed in public conversation as a matter of fairness rather than actuarial calculation.”
Public opinion is also divided over whether people living in disaster-prone areas who can’t get home insurance should move somewhere else, rather than ask for subsidies from the government or other policyholders. 32% agree they should just move, while 39% disagree and accept that subsidies are reasonable. The rest are undecided.
Women have more empathy for those denied insurance cover, as do those more concerned about climate change. Green voters have the most empathy. Those unconcerned about climate change or who deny its existence are more likely to believe that individuals should take responsibility for the risks of climate change.