Behavioural frameworks to understand public perceptions of and risk response to carbon dioxide removal
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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Interface focus 2020-10, Vol.10 (5), p.20200002-20200002 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 20200002 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 20200002 |
container_title | Interface focus |
container_volume | 10 |
creator | Shrum, Trisha R. Markowitz, Ezra Buck, Holly Gregory, Robin van der Linden, Sander Attari, Shahzeen Z. Van Boven, Leaf |
description | 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. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1098/rsfs.2020.0002 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7435046</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2436876195</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-c8d092bad606d076d85c68ac79fe0c7b222adf25270f32def123c4616206ab893</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVUU1P3TAQtKpWBVGunH3s5T026zzHuVQCVD4kJC5wthx7DS5JnNrJK_33dQRU4uSVZ3Z2Z4exkwq2FbTqNGWftwgIWwDAT-wQocaNaqH6_F6rVh2w45x_FQbUslKAX9mBQCUQpDpk_pyezD7EJZme-2QG-hPTc-Zz5MvoKOXZjI5PS9cHyydKlqY5xDHz6PmKpJCfeaI8lT9au6xJXRy5C_ElOCrQEPem_8a-eNNnOn57j9jD5c_7i-vN7d3VzcXZ7cbWQs0bqxy02BknQTpopFM7K5WxTesJbNMhonEed9iAF-jIVyhscSWLGdOpVhyxH6-6ZeOBnKVxLsb0lMJg0l8dTdAfkTE86ce4100tduU-ReD7m0CKvxfKsx5CttT3ZqS4ZI21kKqRVbsr1O0r1aaYcyL_f0wFes1Hr_noNR-95iP-Ab6ZhU0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2436876195</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Behavioural frameworks to understand public perceptions of and risk response to carbon dioxide removal</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Shrum, Trisha R. ; Markowitz, Ezra ; Buck, Holly ; Gregory, Robin ; van der Linden, Sander ; Attari, Shahzeen Z. ; Van Boven, Leaf</creator><creatorcontrib>Shrum, Trisha R. ; Markowitz, Ezra ; Buck, Holly ; Gregory, Robin ; van der Linden, Sander ; Attari, Shahzeen Z. ; Van Boven, Leaf</creatorcontrib><description>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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2042-8898</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2042-8901</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1098/rsfs.2020.0002</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32832068</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>The Royal Society</publisher><subject>Review</subject><ispartof>Interface focus, 2020-10, Vol.10 (5), p.20200002-20200002</ispartof><rights>2020 The Author(s) 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-c8d092bad606d076d85c68ac79fe0c7b222adf25270f32def123c4616206ab893</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-c8d092bad606d076d85c68ac79fe0c7b222adf25270f32def123c4616206ab893</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8940-1238 ; 0000-0001-8660-155X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7435046/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7435046/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,27903,27904,53769,53771</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Shrum, Trisha R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Markowitz, Ezra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buck, Holly</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gregory, Robin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Linden, Sander</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Attari, Shahzeen Z.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Boven, Leaf</creatorcontrib><title>Behavioural frameworks to understand public perceptions of and risk response to carbon dioxide removal</title><title>Interface focus</title><description>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.</description><subject>Review</subject><issn>2042-8898</issn><issn>2042-8901</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpVUU1P3TAQtKpWBVGunH3s5T026zzHuVQCVD4kJC5wthx7DS5JnNrJK_33dQRU4uSVZ3Z2Z4exkwq2FbTqNGWftwgIWwDAT-wQocaNaqH6_F6rVh2w45x_FQbUslKAX9mBQCUQpDpk_pyezD7EJZme-2QG-hPTc-Zz5MvoKOXZjI5PS9cHyydKlqY5xDHz6PmKpJCfeaI8lT9au6xJXRy5C_ElOCrQEPem_8a-eNNnOn57j9jD5c_7i-vN7d3VzcXZ7cbWQs0bqxy02BknQTpopFM7K5WxTesJbNMhonEed9iAF-jIVyhscSWLGdOpVhyxH6-6ZeOBnKVxLsb0lMJg0l8dTdAfkTE86ce4100tduU-ReD7m0CKvxfKsx5CttT3ZqS4ZI21kKqRVbsr1O0r1aaYcyL_f0wFes1Hr_noNR-95iP-Ab6ZhU0</recordid><startdate>20201006</startdate><enddate>20201006</enddate><creator>Shrum, Trisha R.</creator><creator>Markowitz, Ezra</creator><creator>Buck, Holly</creator><creator>Gregory, Robin</creator><creator>van der Linden, Sander</creator><creator>Attari, Shahzeen Z.</creator><creator>Van Boven, Leaf</creator><general>The Royal Society</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8940-1238</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8660-155X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20201006</creationdate><title>Behavioural frameworks to understand public perceptions of and risk response to carbon dioxide removal</title><author>Shrum, Trisha R. ; Markowitz, Ezra ; Buck, Holly ; Gregory, Robin ; van der Linden, Sander ; Attari, Shahzeen Z. ; Van Boven, Leaf</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c438t-c8d092bad606d076d85c68ac79fe0c7b222adf25270f32def123c4616206ab893</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Shrum, Trisha R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Markowitz, Ezra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buck, Holly</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gregory, Robin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Linden, Sander</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Attari, Shahzeen Z.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Boven, Leaf</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Interface focus</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Shrum, Trisha R.</au><au>Markowitz, Ezra</au><au>Buck, Holly</au><au>Gregory, Robin</au><au>van der Linden, Sander</au><au>Attari, Shahzeen Z.</au><au>Van Boven, Leaf</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Behavioural frameworks to understand public perceptions of and risk response to carbon dioxide removal</atitle><jtitle>Interface focus</jtitle><date>2020-10-06</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>20200002</spage><epage>20200002</epage><pages>20200002-20200002</pages><issn>2042-8898</issn><eissn>2042-8901</eissn><abstract>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.</abstract><pub>The Royal Society</pub><pmid>32832068</pmid><doi>10.1098/rsfs.2020.0002</doi><tpages>1</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8940-1238</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8660-155X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2042-8898 |
ispartof | Interface focus, 2020-10, Vol.10 (5), p.20200002-20200002 |
issn | 2042-8898 2042-8901 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7435046 |
source | Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central |
subjects | Review |
title | Behavioural frameworks to understand public perceptions of and risk response to carbon dioxide removal |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T17%3A51%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Behavioural%20frameworks%20to%20understand%20public%20perceptions%20of%20and%20risk%20response%20to%20carbon%20dioxide%20removal&rft.jtitle=Interface%20focus&rft.au=Shrum,%20Trisha%20R.&rft.date=2020-10-06&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=20200002&rft.epage=20200002&rft.pages=20200002-20200002&rft.issn=2042-8898&rft.eissn=2042-8901&rft_id=info:doi/10.1098/rsfs.2020.0002&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2436876195%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2436876195&rft_id=info:pmid/32832068&rfr_iscdi=true |