The The role of emotions in advancing environmental norms: The case of the anti-PFAS norm in the United States

This study analyzes the role of emotions in advancing – or hindering – the adoption of environmental norms. Per- and Polyfluoralkyl substances (PFAS), used for decades in commercial products such as Teflon, Gore-Tex, and firefighting foam on military bases, are now widely understood to cause harm to people's lives and the environment. Despite advancing scientific inquiry, states have long been unwilling to regulate them. Only recently has the anti PFAS norm gained traction leading to several states such as Denmark, Germany and the US to propose and pass laws limiting their use. Why did it take so long for the anti-PFAS norm to emerge? Although it is often assumed that environmental norms advance when scientific evidence of harm is consolidating, political and corporate resistance is low and activism intensifies, we argue that this does not fully explain the advance of the anti-PFAS norm. Focusing on the case study of the US Congress, we hypothesise that emotionally charged language advances norm diffusion, in particular when partisanship would otherwise prevent change. We examine a corpus of text from the 115th-117th Congresses using LDA topic modelling. Our dataset hand-codes whether statements support or oppose PFAS legislation before conducting topic modelling for each category. Furthermore, a speaker-topic network shows the role of individual Congressional norm promoters. We find that emotionally charged legitimation of anti-PFAS measures had a positive impact on norm acceptance. Notably, Republicans, which are strongly inclined to oppose environmental legislation, invoked bipartisanship and the welfare of soldiers (“the troops”) as narratives to legitimize regulation and overcome Republican norms. That said, despite initial reluctance, the antipreneurs used similarly emotionally charged language to suppress norm diffusion, severely limiting the speed of norm diffusion in its later stages.