IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tcpoxx/v23y2023i3p379-394.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public evaluations of four approaches to ocean-based carbon dioxide removal

Author

Listed:
  • Sara Nawaz
  • Guillaume Peterson St-Laurent
  • Terre Satterfield

Abstract

In the face of mounting global climatic pressures, negative emission technologies (NETs) for carbon dioxide removal (CDR) are increasingly proposed as necessary for meeting climate targets. While initial work has identified the potential of terrestrial NETs, a diverse set of marine/ocean-based NETs are gaining new and particular attention. Emerging studies on the feasibility of marine NETs are urgently needed, especially to explore the logics that public groups use to judge different approaches, and to ensure that design and governance of these technologies align with public values and priorities. This study explores factors of interest in understanding public views on four marine NETs, both perceptions of climate severity and urgency, and beliefs about marine environments. It uses a quantitative survey to explore how a representative sample of people in British Columbia, Canada and Washington state, United States evaluate four marine NETs: coastal restoration; ocean alkalinity enhancement; ocean fertilization; and offshore direct air carbon capture and storage. We find that perceived severity and urgency of climate change predicts greater comfort with all NETs studied, and views of marine environments as adaptable, fragile and manageable vary in predicting both greater and lesser comfort. Drawing upon these insights, the paper offers reflections on the conditional thinking linked with emerging views of marine NETs, concluding with methodological suggestions for future research on public perceptions as concerns the deployment of ocean-based CDR near and long term. Incorporating these insights into policy for ocean-based CDR will be important to ensuring responsible governance of these technologies.Key policy insights Incorporating research on public perceptions will be important to the design of marine NETs and accompanying policies.Public groups in both British Columbia and Washington expressed high levels of comfort with coastal restoration, some comfort with offshore direct air carbon capture and storage, and some discomfort with ocean alkalinity enhancement and ocean fertilization.Perceived severity and urgency of climate change predicted greater comfort with all approaches; this evidence aligns with a small but growing body of scholarship indicating openness to environmental intervention amongst public groups concerned with climate impacts.Beliefs about marine environments, namely whether they are ‘adaptable’, ‘manageable’ or ‘fragile’, also predicted comfort, suggesting that CDR in ocean contexts requires further examination regarding public perceptions.

Suggested Citation

  • Sara Nawaz & Guillaume Peterson St-Laurent & Terre Satterfield, 2023. "Public evaluations of four approaches to ocean-based carbon dioxide removal," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 379-394, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:23:y:2023:i:3:p:379-394
    DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2023.2179589
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14693062.2023.2179589
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14693062.2023.2179589?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.

    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:taf:tcpoxx:v:23:y:2023:i:3:p:379-394. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tcpo20 .

    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.