International climate adaptation assistance: Assessing public support in Switzerland

PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0317344 February 12, 2025 25 / 26 PLOS ONE Support for adaptation assistance in Switzerland 65. Dolšak N, Dunn M. Investments in global warming mitigation: the case of “activities implemented jointly”. Policy Sci. 2006;39(3):233–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-006-9020-9 66. Hafner-Burton EM, Mosley L, Galantucci R. Protecting workers abroad and industries at home: rights- based conditionality in trade preference programs. J Conflict Resolut. 2018;63(5):1253–82. https://doi. org/10.1177/0022002718783236 67. Bayramoglu B, Jacques J-F, Nedoncelle C, Neumann-Noel L. International climate aid and trade. J Environ Econ Manag. 2023;117:102748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2022.102748 68. Haas PM, Keohane RO, Levy MA, editors. Institutions for the earth: Sources of effective international environmental protection. MIT Press; 1993. 69. Tingley D, Tomz M. Conditional cooperation and climate change. Comp Polit Stud. 2013;47(3):344–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414013509571 70. Bayram AB, Holmes M. Feeling their pain: affective empathy and public preferences for foreign devel- opment aid. Eur J Int Relat. 2019;26(3):820–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066119890915 71. Eberl J-M, Meltzer CE, Heidenreich T, Herrero B, Theorin N, Lind F, et al. The European media dis- course on immigration and its effects: a literature review. Ann Int Commun Assoc. 2018;42(3):207–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2018.1497452 72. Ingold K. Network structures within policy processes: coalitions, power, and brokerage in Swiss

climate policy. Policy Stud J. 2011;39(3):435–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2011.00416.x 73. Simon M. Key predictors for climate policy support and political mobilization: the role of beliefs and preferences. PLOS Clim. 2023;2(8):e0000145. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000145 74. Montfort S, Fesenfeld L, Stadelmann-Steffen I, Ingold K. Policy sequencing can increase public sup- port for ambitious climate policy. Policy Soc. 2023;42(4):454–77. 75. Bradley S. Swiss Approve Net-zero Climate Law. Swissinfo.ch. [cited 2023 Jun 18]. Available from: https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss-to-decide-on-net-zero-climate-law/48593158 76. Häusermann S, Kurer T, Traber D. The politics of trade-offs: studying the dynamics of wel- fare state reform with conjoint experiments. Comp Polit Stud. 2018;52(7):1059–95. https://doi. org/10.1177/0010414018797943 77. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs. (2024). Switzerland’s official development assistance. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs – Economic Cooperation and Development; 2024. Available from: https://www.seco-cooperation.admin.ch/secocoop/en/home/strategy/focus/official-develop- ment-aid-switzerland.html 78. Cabré G. Le budget de l’aide au développement menace par de coupes drastiques. RTS Info. [cited 2024 Jul 17]. Available from: https://www.rts.ch/info/suisse/2024/article/le-budget-de-l-aide-au-devel- oppement-menace-de-coupes-drastiques-28571727.html 79. Schaffer LM, Oehl B, Bernauer T. Are policymakers responsive to public demand in climate politics? J

Pub Pol. 2021;42(1):136–64. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0143814x21000088 80. Hainmueller J, Hangartner D, Yamamoto T. Validating vignette and conjoint survey experiments against real-world behavior. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2015;112(8):2395–400. https://doi.org/10.1073/ pnas.1416587112 PMID: 25646415 81. Bansak K, Hainmueller J, Hopkins DJ, Yamamoto T. The number of choice tasks and survey satisfic- ing in conjoint experiments. Polit Anal. 2018;26(1):112–9. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2017.40 82. Boas TC, Christenson DP, Glick DM. Recruiting large online samples in the United States and India: Facebook, Mechanical Turk, and Qualtrics. Polit Sci Res Methods. 2018;8(2):232–50. https://doi. org/10.1017/psrm.2018.28 83. Zack ES, Kennedy J, Long JS. Can nonprobability samples be used for social science research? A cautionary tale. Surv Res Methods. 2019;13(2):215–27. 84. Mullinix KJ, Leeper TJ, Druckman JN, Freese J. The generalizability of survey experiments. J Exp Polit Sci. 2015;2(2):109–38. https://doi.org/10.1017/xps.2015.19 85. Horiuchi Y, Markovich Z, Yamamoto T. Does conjoint analysis mitigate social desirability bias? Polit Anal. 2021;30(4):535–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2021.30 86. Hainmueller J, Hopkins DJ, Yamamoto T. Causal inference in conjoint analysis: understanding multidimensional choices via stated preference experiments. Polit Anal. 2014;22(1):1–30. https://doi. org/10.1093/pan/mpt024 87. Leeper TJ, Hobolt SB, Tilley J. Measuring subgroup preferences in conjoint experiments. Polit Anal. 2019;28(2):207–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2019.30

88. Brönnimann S, Appenzeller C, Croci‐Maspoli M, Fuhrer J, Grosjean M, Hohmann R, et al. Climate change in Switzerland: a review of physical, institutional, and political aspects. WIREs Clim Chang. 2014;5(4):461–81. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.280