How a speed limit sparked a culture war
This isn't the first time this has happened. It won't be the last.
On 17 September, a new 20mph ‘default’ speed limit came into force in Wales — meaning that where the default speed limit in urban areas had been 30mph unless specified, it’s now 20mph. The intended effect of this is more cars driving at safer speeds where people live, work and play. Emerging evidence suggests it works.
What’s happened?
Legitimate concerns about the implementation of the new limits were hijacked by divisive political messaging, social media algorithms and click-funded local news. The result has been protests, threats to political leaders and mass petitions against the policy.
Why does it matter?
The policy is just one part of the Welsh Government’s broader environmental agenda. Like a lot of climate policies coming down the pipeline, it requires the public to make small changes in behaviour. It’s revealed just how easy it is for malign political actors to leverage the public’s fear of change to create a culture war.
This isn’t the first this has happened. It won’t be the last.
Has the culture war had an impact on broader public opinion?
The polling presents a mixed picture.
A recent poll for ITV Wales found only 31% supporting the policy (that’s very bad — but an outlier poll).
Deputy Climate Change Minister Lee Waters — who’s spearheading the policy — maintains that the Welsh Government’s internal surveys show support at closer to 50%.
Another poll for Redfield & Wilton Strategies found support at 46%.
The one thing we can say for sure is that support is on the decline: research commissioned by the Welsh Government published in September 2022 had public support at 60%.
Note: This isn’t necessarily cause for concern. As with many big behavioural changes, opposition peaks just before they’re implemented, only to subside as people get used to them. This phenomenon of public opinion dynamics is so common it has its own curve: The Goodwin Curve.
Why did a speed limit cause a culture war in the first place?
Aside from the usual culprits (social media algorithms and divisive local news), the answer may also lie in the ‘Super Distrusters’.
This term was recently coined by MHP Group in their polarisation tracker polling of the United Kingdom (obvious caveat here that there is no Wales-specific breakdown of the data). Super Distrusters are a diverse group that we commonly — and mistakenly — lump together as ‘conspiracy theorists’.
Here’s what we know about the Super Distrusters:
They can be found across all social, economic and political demographics — they lean more heavily to non-mainstream parties.
They make up 29% of UK adults.
They are characterised by their belief that the world is going in the wrong direction, that it’s rigged in favour of the ‘Elites’ and that these ‘Elites’ act against the interests of ‘the people’.
It’s obvious that a policy like 20mph speed limits might not go down well with Super Distrusters, but the real danger lies in the Super Distrusters being able to mobilise a group called the ‘Moderate Trusters’ (the larger group of ambivalent people in the middle) in opposition to the policy too.
Based on MHP’s research, here is what the Super Distrusters and Moderate Trusters agree on:
‘People in positions of power often work together to frustrate the will of the people if it goes against their political agenda’
‘Our rulers are constantly looking for new ways to secretly monitor and control us’
‘It’s not paranoid to think that our freedoms and civil liberties are under threat from the elite’
How is this relevant to 20mph and other climate policies?
Well, based on the above, whenever you have a progressive environmental policy that involves:
Public backlash which has to be ignored or overruled to some degree;
The monitoring or limiting of driving behaviour;
Expertise trickling down from academic ‘Elites’ into policies which affect ‘the people’;
… you are at risk of backlash spilling out beyond the Super Distrusters and into the public more broadly.
So, what can we do about it?
One thing we can do is look at who is communicating our key messages. The MHP research usefully looks at messengers across two questions:
Are they trusted by the public?
Are they considered ‘Elites’ or ‘non-Elite’?
What we ideally want is advocates for our policies who are trusted, and a healthy mix of Elite and non-Elite.
Here are some messengers the numbers tentatively suggest might be more effective for a policy like 20mph:
Charities (Trusted, non-Elite)
Scientists (Trusted, Elite)
Universities (Trusted, Elite)
Here are some messengers the numbers suggest might be less effective with sceptical audiences:
Activists / The Labour Party (Not trusted, non-Elite)
The government (Not trusted, Elite)
The media (Not trusted, Elite)
What do you think?
This is just one piece of research, and one model for understanding and segmenting the public.
I’m keen to hear from those of you who have experience with Super Distrusters in your own work, whether that’s in climate, health or somewhere else. Maybe you’ve seen it in the private sector (spoiler: the Super Distrusters don’t trust you either!). What do you think works with these groups?
As always, feedback welcome. And if you found this interesting or useful, please consider sharing it with people in your network who might find value in it.
Thanks for reading the inaugural post from Deeper Truths! If you’d like to know more about how I can support you and your organisation, just hit reply or email me on misinfo@stefanrollnick.com