IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/wirecc/v3y2012i5p451-466.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perceptions of geoengineering: public attitudes, stakeholder perspectives, and the challenge of ‘upstream’ engagement

Author

Listed:
  • Adam Corner
  • Nick Pidgeon
  • Karen Parkhill

Abstract

Geoengineering—the deliberate large‐scale manipulation of the planetary environment to counteract anthropogenic climate change—is receiving an increasing amount of attention from academics, policy and civil society stakeholders, and members of the general public. This article reviews the available literature on perceptions of geoengineering, including public attitudes and stakeholder perspectives. We describe some of the challenges of engaging with these audiences at such an ‘upstream’ phase in the development of geoengineering technologies. We conclude with reflections on the importance of eliciting public and stakeholder views, despite the challenges associated with upstream engagement, and identify a number of key research priorities for those involved in upstream engagement on geoengineering. WIREs Clim Change 2012 doi: 10.1002/wcc.176 This article is categorized under: Perceptions, Behavior, and Communication of Climate Change > Perceptions of Climate Change

Suggested Citation

  • Adam Corner & Nick Pidgeon & Karen Parkhill, 2012. "Perceptions of geoengineering: public attitudes, stakeholder perspectives, and the challenge of ‘upstream’ engagement," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(5), pages 451-466, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:wirecc:v:3:y:2012:i:5:p:451-466
    DOI: 10.1002/wcc.176
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.176
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/wcc.176?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Pelai, Ricardo & Hagerman, Shannon M. & Kozak, Robert, 2020. "Biotechnologies in agriculture and forestry: Governance insights from a comparative systematic review of barriers and recommendations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    2. Ashish Dwivedi & Claudio Sassanelli & Dindayal Agrawal & Md. Abdul Moktadir & Idiano D'Adamo, 2023. "Drivers to mitigate climate change in context of manufacturing industry: An emerging economy study," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(7), pages 4467-4484, November.
    3. Carola Braun & Christine Merk & Gert Pönitzsch & Katrin Rehdanz & Ulrich Schmidt, 2018. "Public perception of climate engineering and carbon capture and storage in Germany: survey evidence," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 471-484, April.
    4. Shannan K. Sweet & Jonathon P. Schuldt & Johannes Lehmann & Deborah A. Bossio & Dominic Woolf, 2021. "Perceptions of naturalness predict US public support for Soil Carbon Storage as a climate solution," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 1-15, May.
    5. Pelai, Ricardo & Hagerman, Shannon M. & Kozak, Robert, 2021. "Whose expertise counts? Assisted migration and the politics of knowledge in British Columbia’s public forests," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    6. Amelung, Dorothee & Funke, Joachim, 2013. "Dealing with the uncertainties of climate engineering: Warnings from a psychological complex problem solving perspective," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 32-40.

    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:wly:wirecc:v:3:y:2012:i:5:p:451-466. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1757-7799 .

    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.