Having just returned from Copenhagen, it’s clear to me that the chances of a global deal on climate change being struck remain on a knife-edge. The issue that is emerging as the key to the success or failure of the summit is finance for developing countries.

Developing country governments see the creation of a $100 billion climate fund as being essential to enable them to take action to limit their emissions and adapt to climate impacts. To his credit, Gordon Brown has made the fund a priority and is taking a lead in pushing other richer countries to make real financial commitments. In so doing, he has made it clear that the UK will contribute its fair share.

However, ippr research suggests that even if the Prime Minister can convince other world leaders, he may struggle with a key part of the UK electorate. A new survey commissioned by the ippr of over 3,000 prospective voters in 157 marginal constituencies suggests that only 16% strongly or very strongly support the idea of a climate fund to help poorer countries, while 20% are strongly or very strongly opposed. A significant proportion of people in the ippr survey were concerned about the cost to taxpayers and the possibility of money being wasted by corrupt leaders.

The survey is the first of its kind to focus on attitudes towards climate policy in marginal constituencies in the run-up to an election – and in some ways its key findings are not very surprising. Ippr does not believe there is much support for the flat earth theories of the climate change deniers, but at a time of recession, with many people struggling financially, it is clearly a hard sell for politicians to persuade their own voters that the UK is going to have to pay to get a climate deal. People need to know why it’s needed and reassured that it won’t be wasted or paid for entirely by the taxpayer. If this is done well, however, then the pubic might be persuaded to support a deal. Our survey suggests that if people are presented with clear evidence and a compelling case, their positions do shift:

* 63% of respondents said that they felt more supportive of the policy when told: ‘forests soak up a lot of the pollution we emit. Unless we help poorer countries protect them, they will be lost forever’, while only 10% said it made them feel less supportive
* 52% said they felt more supportive when told: ‘Climate change could cause major food shortages and drive up food prices in the UK, unless we help countries that produce a lot of food adapt to climate change’, while only 10% said it made them less supportive
* 47% said they were more supportive when told: ‘Last year, 11 million people in East Africa – many of them children – suffered from drought, which will become much more common as climate change gets worse, unless we help’, whereas only 16% said they felt less supportive as a result.

Ultimately, if the UK, like other developed countries, is to sustain a significant, long-term commitment to providing financial assistance to poor countries to help them address climate change, the public needs to be brought on board. It’s easy to forget in the heat of the negotiations at Copenhagen, but in the end, a global deal is meaningless unless it can be delivered on the ground, and for that to happen addressing the real political constraints to action domestically is critical.