IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v177y2024i4d10.1007_s10584-024-03708-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public opinion about solar radiation management: A cross-cultural study in 20 countries around the world

Author

Listed:
  • Nadja Contzen

    (Eawag: Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology
    University of Groningen)

  • Goda Perlaviciute

    (University of Groningen)

  • Linda Steg

    (University of Groningen)

  • Sophie Charlotte Reckels

    (Eawag: Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology)

  • Susana Alves

    (Sapienza University of Rome)

  • David Bidwell

    (University of Rhode Island)

  • Gisela Böhm

    (University of Bergen
    Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences)

  • Marino Bonaiuto

    (Sapienza University of Rome
    Sapienza University of Rome)

  • Li-Fang Chou

    (National Cheng Kung University)

  • Victor Corral-Verdugo

    (University of Sonora)

  • Federica Dessi

    (Sapienza University of Rome)

  • Thomas Dietz

    (Michigan State University)

  • Rouven Doran

    (University of Bergen)

  • Maria do Carmo Eulálio

    (State University of Paraíba)

  • Kelly Fielding

    (University of Queensland)

  • Cristina Gómez-Román

    (Universidade de Santiago de Compostela)

  • Juliana V. Granskaya

    (St. Petersburg State University)

  • Tatyana Gurikova

    (St. Petersburg State University)

  • Bernardo Hernández

    (University of La Laguna)

  • Maira P. Kabakova

    (Al-Farabi Kazakh National University)

  • Chieh-Yu Lee

    (University of Groningen
    National Cheng Kung University)

  • Fan Li

    (China Agricultural University)

  • Maria Luísa Lima

    (Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL))

  • Lu Liu

    (University of Groningen)

  • Sílvia Luís

    (Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL))

  • Gabriel Muinos

    (University of Groningen)

  • Charles A. Ogunbode

    (University of Bergen
    University of Nottingham)

  • María Victoria Ortiz

    (Universidad Nacional de Córdoba (UNC))

  • Nick Pidgeon

    (Cardiff University)

  • Maria Argüello Pitt

    (Universidad Nacional de Córdoba (UNC))

  • Leila Rahimi

    (University of Tabriz)

  • Anastasia Revokatova

    (Yu. A. Izrael Institute of Global Climate and Ecology)

  • Cecilia Reyna

    (Universidad Nacional de Córdoba (UNC))

  • Geertje Schuitema

    (University College Dublin)

  • Rachael Shwom

    (Rutgers University)

  • Nur Soylu Yalcinkaya

    (Bogazici University)

  • Elspeth Spence

    (Cardiff University)

  • Bernadette Sütterlin

    (ETH Zurich
    Zurich University of Applied Sciences)

Abstract

Some argue that complementing climate change mitigation measures with solar radiation management (SRM) might prove a last resort to limit global warming to 1.5 °C. To make a socially responsible decision on whether to use SRM, it is important to consider also public opinion, across the globe and particularly in the Global South, which would face the greatest risks from both global warming and SRM. However, most research on public opinion about SRM stems from the Global North. We report findings from the first large-scale, cross-cultural study on the public opinion about SRM among the general public (N = 2,248) and students (N = 4,583) in 20 countries covering all inhabited continents, including five countries from the Global South and five ‘non-WEIRD’ (i.e. not Western, Educated, Industrialised, Rich, and Democratic) countries from the Global North. As public awareness of SRM is usually low, we provided participants with information on SRM, including key arguments in favour of and against SRM that appear in the scientific debate. On average, acceptability of SRM was significantly higher in the Global South than in the ‘non-WEIRD’ Global North, while acceptability in the ‘WEIRD’ Global North was in between. However, we found substantial variation within these clusters, especially in the ‘non-WEIRD’ Global North, suggesting that countries do not form homogenous clusters and should thus be considered individually. Moreover, the average participants’ views, while generally neither strong nor polarised, differed from some expert views in important ways, including that participants perceived SRM as only slightly effective in limiting global warming. Still, our data suggests overall a conditional, reluctant acceptance. That is, while on average, people think SRM would have mostly negative consequences, they may still be willing to tolerate it as a potential last resort to fight global warming, particularly if they think SRM has only minor negative (or even positive) impacts on humans and nature.

Suggested Citation

  • Nadja Contzen & Goda Perlaviciute & Linda Steg & Sophie Charlotte Reckels & Susana Alves & David Bidwell & Gisela Böhm & Marino Bonaiuto & Li-Fang Chou & Victor Corral-Verdugo & Federica Dessi & Thoma, 2024. "Public opinion about solar radiation management: A cross-cultural study in 20 countries around the world," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(4), pages 1-25, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:177:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s10584-024-03708-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-024-03708-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-024-03708-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-024-03708-3?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:spr:climat:v:177:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s10584-024-03708-3. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.