IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ifwkie/270884.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

German citizens’ preference for domestic carbon dioxide removal by afforestation is incompatible with national removal potential

Author

Listed:
  • Merk, Christine
  • Liebe, Ulf
  • Meyerhoff, Jürgen
  • Rehdanz, Katrin

Abstract

Efficient and sustainable solutions for offsetting residual emissions via carbon dioxide removal are a major challenge. Proposed removal methods result in trade-offs with other Sustainable Development Goals, and the removal needs of many countries exceed their domestic potentials. Here, we examine the public acceptability of conducting afforestation and direct air capture programmes domestically in Germany or abroad. To uncover the relative importance of various programme attributes, we use a multifactorial vignette experiment. We find that afforestation receives stronger support than direct capture. Next to the costs to households, minimising environmental impacts on biodiversity in forests and the use of renewable energy for direct capture are more important for acceptability than the permanence of storage. Further, individuals strongly prefer domestic programmes to offsets in other countries. These findings suggest significant discrepancies between strong public preferences for domestic carbon removal with low environmental side-effects and the too low potential for such removals.

Suggested Citation

  • Merk, Christine & Liebe, Ulf & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2023. "German citizens’ preference for domestic carbon dioxide removal by afforestation is incompatible with national removal potential," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 270884, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ifwkie:270884
    DOI: 10.1038/s43247-023-00713-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/270884/1/s43247-023-00713-9.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s43247-023-00713-9?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. Matthias Honegger & Axel Michaelowa & Joyashree Roy, 2021. "Potential implications of carbon dioxide removal for the sustainable development goals," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(5), pages 678-698, May.
    2. Tavoni, Massimo & Bosetti, Valentina & Shayegh, Soheil & Drouet, Laurent & Emmerling, Johannes & Fuss, Sabine & Goeschl, Timo & Guivarch, Celine & Lontzek, Thomas S. & Manoussi, Vassiliki & Moreno-Cru, 2017. "Challenges and Opportunities for Integrated Modeling of Climate Engineering," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 263160, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    3. Paul Slovic, 1999. "Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics, and Science: Surveying the Risk‐Assessment Battlefield," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 689-701, August.
    4. S. V. Hanssen & V. Daioglou & Z. J. N. Steinmann & J. C. Doelman & D. P. Vuuren & M. A. J. Huijbregts, 2020. "The climate change mitigation potential of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 10(11), pages 1023-1029, November.
    5. 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.
    6. Joachim Schleich & Elisabeth Dütschke & Claudia Schwirplies & Andreas Ziegler, 2016. "Citizens' perceptions of justice in international climate policy: an empirical analysis," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(1), pages 50-67, January.
    7. Danny Otto & Marit Sprenkeling & Ruben Peuchen & Åsta Dyrnes Nordø & Dimitrios Mendrinos & Spyridon Karytsas & Siri Veland & Olympia Polyzou & Martha Lien & Yngve Heggelund & Matthias Gross & Pim Piek, 2022. "On the Organisation of Translation—An Inter- and Transdisciplinary Approach to Developing Design Options for CO 2 Storage Monitoring Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-22, August.
    8. 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.
    9. Daniel P. Carlisle & Pamela M. Feetham & Malcolm J. Wright & Damon A. H. Teagle, 2020. "The public remain uninformed and wary of climate engineering," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 160(2), pages 303-322, May.
    10. L׳Orange Seigo, Selma & Dohle, Simone & Siegrist, Michael, 2014. "Public perception of carbon capture and storage (CCS): A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 848-863.
    11. Eric A. Coleman & Bill Schultz & Vijay Ramprasad & Harry Fischer & Pushpendra Rana & Anthony M. Filippi & Burak Güneralp & Andong Ma & Claudia Rodriguez Solorzano & Vijay Guleria & Rajesh Rana & Forre, 2021. "Limited effects of tree planting on forest canopy cover and rural livelihoods in Northern India," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 4(11), pages 997-1004, November.
    12. Rickels, Wilfried & Merk, Christine & Reith, Fabian & Keller, David P. & Oschlies, Andreas, 2019. "(Mis)conceptions about modeling of negative emissions technologies," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 225999, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    13. Baranzini, Andrea & Borzykowski, Nicolas & Carattini, Stefano, 2018. "Carbon offsets out of the woods? Acceptability of domestic vs. international reforestation programmes in the lab," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 1-12.
    14. Marilou Jobin & Michael Siegrist, 2020. "Support for the Deployment of Climate Engineering: A Comparison of Ten Different Technologies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(5), pages 1058-1078, May.
    15. Kimberly S. Wolske & Kaitlin T. Raimi & Victoria Campbell-Arvai & P. Sol Hart, 2019. "Public support for carbon dioxide removal strategies: the role of tampering with nature perceptions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 345-361, March.
    16. Aggarwal, Ashish, 2020. "Improving forest governance or messing it up? Analyzing impact of forest carbon projects on existing governance mechanisms with evidence from India," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    17. Keywan Riahi & Christoph Bertram & Daniel Huppmann & Joeri Rogelj & Valentina Bosetti & Anique-Marie Cabardos & Andre Deppermann & Laurent Drouet & Stefan Frank & Oliver Fricko & Shinichiro Fujimori &, 2021. "Cost and attainability of meeting stringent climate targets without overshoot," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 11(12), pages 1063-1069, December.
    18. Vivek N. Mathur & Stavros Afionis & Jouni Paavola & Andrew J. Dougill & Lindsay C. Stringer, 2014. "Experiences of host communities with carbon market projects: towards multi-level climate justice," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 42-62, January.
    19. Rob Bellamy & Shannon Osaka, 2020. "Unnatural climate solutions?," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 10(2), pages 98-99, February.
    20. Huijts, Nicole M.A. & Midden, Cees J.H. & Meijnders, Anneloes L., 2007. "Social acceptance of carbon dioxide storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2780-2789, May.
    21. Carlos Pozo & Ángel Galán-Martín & David M. Reiner & Niall Dowell & Gonzalo Guillén-Gosálbez, 2020. "Equity in allocating carbon dioxide removal quotas," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 10(7), pages 640-646, July.
    22. Emily Cox & Elspeth Spence & Nick Pidgeon, 2020. "Public perceptions of carbon dioxide removal in the United States and the United Kingdom," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 10(8), pages 744-749, August.
    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. Gruener, Sven & Soliev, Ilkhom & Pirscher, Frauke, 2024. "Multiple crises in mind, biodiversity out of sight? Insights from a behavioral study in Germany," OSF Preprints q4upd, Center for Open Science.
    2. Merk, Christine & Andersen, Gisle & Nordø, Åsta Dyrnes & Helfrich, Torben, 2023. "Carbon Capture and Storage: Publics in five countries around the North Sea prefer to do it on their own territory," Kiel Working Papers 2252, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).

    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. Benjamin K. Sovacool & Chad M. Baum & Sean Low, 2022. "Determining our climate policy future: expert opinions about negative emissions and solar radiation management pathways," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 27(8), pages 1-50, December.
    2. Elspeth Spence & Emily Cox & Nick Pidgeon, 2021. "Exploring cross-national public support for the use of enhanced weathering as a land-based carbon dioxide removal strategy," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 1-18, March.
    3. Ariane Wenger & Michael Stauffacher & Irina Dallo, 2021. "Public perception and acceptance of negative emission technologies – framing effects in Switzerland," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-20, August.
    4. Motlaghzadeh, Kasra & Schweizer, Vanessa & Craik, Neil & Moreno-Cruz, Juan, 2023. "Key uncertainties behind global projections of direct air capture deployment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 348(C).
    5. Ángel Galán-Martín & Daniel Vázquez & Selene Cobo & Niall Dowell & José Antonio Caballero & Gonzalo Guillén-Gosálbez, 2021. "Delaying carbon dioxide removal in the European Union puts climate targets at risk," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    6. Gea Hoogendoorn & Bernadette Sütterlin & Michael Siegrist, 2021. "Tampering with Nature: A Systematic Review," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(1), pages 141-156, January.
    7. Rana, Pushpendra & Fleischman, Forrest & Ramprasad, Vijay & Lee, Kangjae, 2022. "Predicting wasteful spending in tree planting programs in Indian Himalaya," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    8. Carola Braun, 2017. "Not in My Backyard: CCS Sites and Public Perception of CCS," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(12), pages 2264-2275, December.
    9. Galán-Martín, Ángel & Contreras, María del Mar & Romero, Inmaculada & Ruiz, Encarnación & Bueno-Rodríguez, Salvador & Eliche-Quesada, Dolores & Castro-Galiano, Eulogio, 2022. "The potential role of olive groves to deliver carbon dioxide removal in a carbon-neutral Europe: Opportunities and challenges," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    10. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Beyond the triangle of renewable energy acceptance: The five dimensions of domestic hydrogen acceptance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    11. Yang, Lin & Zhang, Xian & McAlinden, Karl J., 2016. "The effect of trust on people's acceptance of CCS (carbon capture and storage) technologies: Evidence from a survey in the People's Republic of China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 69-79.
    12. Vögele, Stefan & Rübbelke, Dirk & Mayer, Philip & Kuckshinrichs, Wilhelm, 2018. "Germany’s “No” to carbon capture and storage: Just a question of lacking acceptance?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 205-218.
    13. 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.
    14. Beckage, Brian & Lacasse, Katherine & Raimi, Kaitlin T. & Visioni, Daniele, 2023. "Integrating Risk Perception with Climate Models to Understand the Potential Deployment of Solar Radiation Modification to Mitigate Climate Change," RFF Working Paper Series 23-22, Resources for the Future.
    15. Eric Buah & Lassi Linnanen & Huapeng Wu & Martin A. Kesse, 2020. "Can Artificial Intelligence Assist Project Developers in Long-Term Management of Energy Projects? The Case of CO 2 Capture and Storage," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-15, November.
    16. M.J. Mace & Claire L. Fyson & Michiel Schaeffer & William L. Hare, 2021. "Large‐Scale Carbon Dioxide Removal to Meet the 1.5°C Limit: Key Governance Gaps, Challenges and Priority Responses," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S1), pages 67-81, April.
    17. Stavroula Evangelopoulou & Alessia De Vita & Georgios Zazias & Pantelis Capros, 2019. "Energy System Modelling of Carbon-Neutral Hydrogen as an Enabler of Sectoral Integration within a Decarbonization Pathway," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-24, July.
    18. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Baum, Chad M. & Low, Sean, 2023. "Beyond climate stabilization: Exploring the perceived sociotechnical co-impacts of carbon removal and solar geoengineering," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    19. Lea S. Svenningsen, 2019. "Social preferences for distributive outcomes of climate policy," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 157(2), pages 319-336, November.
    20. Liu, Bingsheng & Xu, Yinghua & Yang, Yang & Lu, Shijian, 2021. "How public cognition influences public acceptance of CCUS in China: Based on the ABC (affect, behavior, and cognition) model of attitudes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:ifwkie:270884. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iwkiede.html .

    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.