Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Behavioural frameworks to understand public perceptions of and risk response to carbon dioxide removal.
Shrum, Trisha R; Markowitz, Ezra; Buck, Holly; Gregory, Robin; van der Linden, Sander; Attari, Shahzeen Z; Van Boven, Leaf.
Afiliación
  • Shrum TR; Department of Community Development and Applied Economics, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA.
  • Markowitz E; Department of Environmental Conservation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA.
  • Buck H; Institute of the Environment and Sustainability and School of Law, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
  • Gregory R; Decision Research, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  • van der Linden S; Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
  • Attari SZ; O'Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
  • Van Boven L; Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA.
Interface Focus ; 10(5): 20200002, 2020 Oct 06.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32832068
The adoption of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies at a scale sufficient to draw down carbon emissions will require both individual and collective decisions that happen over time in different locations to enable a massive scale-up. Members of the public and other decision-makers have not yet formed strong attitudes, beliefs and preferences about most of the individual CDR technologies or taken positions on policy mechanisms and tax-payer support for CDR. Much of the current discourse among scientists, policy analysts and policy-makers about CDR implicitly assumes that decision-makers will exhibit unbiased, rational behaviour that weighs the costs and benefits of CDR. In this paper, we review behavioural decision theory and discuss how public reactions to CDR will be different from and more complex than that implied by rational choice theory. Given that people do not form attitudes and opinions in a vacuum, we outline how fundamental social normative principles shape important intergroup, intragroup and social network processes that influence support for or opposition to CDR technologies. We also point to key insights that may help stakeholders craft public outreach strategies that anticipate the nuances of how people evaluate the risks and benefits of CDR approaches. Finally, we outline critical research questions to understand the behavioural components of CDR to plan for an emerging public response.
Palabras clave
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Etiology_studies / Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Revista: Interface Focus Año: 2020 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos Pais de publicación: Reino Unido
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Etiology_studies / Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Revista: Interface Focus Año: 2020 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos Pais de publicación: Reino Unido