Environmental Politics
We measure the effects of PG&E's public-safety power shut-offs (PSPS) on public support for costly pro-environmental referenda in California.
As climate change accelerates, governments are implementing a growing number and scale of climate adaptation measures. While research shows direct climate hazards can increase pro-climate behavior, we know less about the political impact of climate adaptation policies. Existing studies on such policies find no effect on climate attitudes. However, their reliance on survey outcomes to measure behavioral preferences leaves a critical gap in our understanding of their effects on realized political behaviors. This paper bridges this critical gap by estimating the effect of Public Safety Power Shut-offs (PSPS) as a climate adaptation measure on voting outcomes for pro-climate ballot propositions. We construct a novel dataset matching granular PSPS outage data to census block group electoral returns and use Difference-in-Differences and Two-Way Fixed Effects models to estimate causal impacts. Contrary to prior survey findings, we find PSPS exposure causally increased pro-climate voting, attenuating a statewide decline in support. This effect is concentrated in Republican-leaning areas. Our findings illustrate that adaptation measures can mobilize new electorates and underscore the importance of measuring realized behavior over stated attitudes.
Keywords: public safety power shut-offs, wildfires, environmental voting, climate change
Midwest Political Science Association 2026.