IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/engenv/v23y2012i2-3p345-365.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Procedural Justice in Carbon Capture and Storage

Author

Listed:
  • Duncan P McLaren

    (mclaren environmental, Västerås, Sweden, and Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, UK)

Abstract

This paper examines where and how claims of procedural injustice, or demands for procedural justice, might arise with respect to carbon capture and storage (CCS), taking a broad view of the CCS research, development and deployment process. It considers the principles that might govern such claims and seeks to identify where responsibility might lie for ensuring justice, or addressing contested claims of injustice. It is suggested that claims of procedural injustice arising from CCS are most likely to arise during implementation, from locally affected populations, raising concerns of inadequate information or consultation; but they may also arise from representatives of other indirectly affected groups, such as those affected by upstream impacts of coal mining, or energy market consequences of CCS policy. It is further suggested that claims are most likely to be directed at public authorities in respect of decisions over policy, strategy or authorisations for individual developments, but there are also routes by which claims may be directed at the corporations involved, especially under human rights provisions. The paper suggests a need for careful consideration of both procedural and, by implication, distributive justice matters in the emerging regulatory and support framework for CCS, with a particular imperative for moving public engagement upstream prior to deployment and indeed even to research programmes, to maximise the scope for legitimate influence on future outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Duncan P McLaren, 2012. "Procedural Justice in Carbon Capture and Storage," Energy & Environment, , vol. 23(2-3), pages 345-365, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:engenv:v:23:y:2012:i:2-3:p:345-365
    DOI: 10.1260/0958-305X.23.2-3.345
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1260/0958-305X.23.2-3.345
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1260/0958-305X.23.2-3.345?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simon Joss & Arthur Brownlea, 1999. "Considering the concept of procedural justice for public policy- and decision-making in science and technology," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(5), pages 321-330, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wil Burns & Simon Nicholson, 2017. "Bioenergy and carbon capture with storage (BECCS): the prospects and challenges of an emerging climate policy response," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 7(4), pages 527-534, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sara H. Wilford, 2018. "First Line Steps in Requirements Identification for Guidelines Development in Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI)," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 539-556, October.
    2. Elias Damtew & Barbara Mierlo & Rico Lie & Paul Struik & Cees Leeuwis & Berga Lemaga & Christine Smart, 2020. "Governing a Collective Bad: Social Learning in the Management of Crop Diseases," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 111-134, February.
    3. John C Besley & Aaron M McCright & Nagwan R Zahry & Kevin C Elliott & Norbert E Kaminski & Joseph D Martin, 2017. "Perceived conflict of interest in health science partnerships," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-20, April.
    4. Peter John & Aaron Martin & Gosia Mikołajczak, 2023. "Support for behavioral nudges versus alternative policy instruments and their perceived fairness and efficacy," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 363-371, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:engenv:v:23:y:2012:i:2-3:p:345-365. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.