What do people think when they think about solar geoengineering? A review of empirical social science literature, and prospects for future research. Issue 11 (1st November 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Burns, Elizabeth T.; Flegal, Jane A.; Keith, David W.; Mahajan, Aseem; Tingley, Dustin; Wagner, Gernot
• Is Part Of: Earth's future. Volume 4:Issue 11(2016)
• Page Start: 536
• Page End: 542
• Publication Date: 2016-11-01
• Subjects: solar geoengineering -- solar radiation management -- climate engineering -- GLOBAL CHANGE -- Abrupt/rapid climate change -- Impacts of global change; Environmental sciences -- Periodicals; Environmental sciences; Periodicals; 550
• DOI: 10.1002/2016EF000461
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2328-4277

Abstract

Abstract: Public views and values about solar geoengineering should be incorporated in science‐policy decisions, if decision makers want to act in the public interest. In reflecting on the past decade of research, we review around 30 studies investigating public familiarity with, and views about, solar geoengineering. A number of recurring patterns emerge: (1) general unfamiliarity with geoengineering among publics; (2) the importance of artifice versus naturalness; (3) some conditional support for certain kinds of research; and (4) nuanced findings on the "moral hazard" and "reverse moral hazard" hypotheses, with empirical support for each appearing under different circumstances and populations. We argue that in the coming decade, empirical social science research on solar geoengineering will be crucial, and should be integrated with physical scientific research. Key Points: Empirical social science research on public views of solar geoengineering is methodologically diverse, focused mostly on the Global North Framing solar geoengineering poses a particular challenge, as the mere introduction of the topic can bias views Studies find some conditional—perhaps reluctant—openness to certain kinds of solar geoengineering research