LIVIVO - Search results -

Search results

Result 1 - 10 of total 21

Search options

Article ; Online: Public perceptions and support of climate intervention technologies across the Global North and Global South.

Baum, Chad M / Fritz, Livia / Low, Sean / Sovacool, Benjamin K

2024 Volume 15, Issue 1, Page(s) 2060

Abstract: Novel, potentially radical climate intervention technologies like carbon dioxide removal and solar geoengineering are attracting attention as the adverse impacts of climate change are increasingly felt. The ability of publics, particularly in the Global ... ...

Abstract	Novel, potentially radical climate intervention technologies like carbon dioxide removal and solar geoengineering are attracting attention as the adverse impacts of climate change are increasingly felt. The ability of publics, particularly in the Global South, to participate in discussions about research, policy, and deployment is restricted amidst a lack of familiarity and engagement. Drawing on a large-scale, cross-country exercise of nationally representative surveys (N = 30,284) in 30 countries and 19 languages, this article establishes the first global baseline of public perceptions of climate-intervention technologies. Here, we show that Global South publics are significantly more favorable about potential benefits and express greater support for climate-intervention technologies. The younger age and level of climate urgency and vulnerability of these publics emerge as key explanatory variables, particularly for solar geoengineering. Conversely, Global South publics express greater concern that climate-intervention technologies could undermine climate-mitigation efforts, and that solar geoengineering could promote an unequal distribution of risks between poor and rich countries.
Language	English
Publishing date	2024-03-06
Publishing country	England
Document type	Journal Article
ZDB-ID	2553671-0
ISSN	2041-1723 ; 2041-1723
ISSN (online)	2041-1723
ISSN	2041-1723
DOI	10.1038/s41467-024-46341-5
Database	MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

Order via subito

This service is chargeable due to the Delivery terms set by subito. Orders including an article and supplementary material will be classified as separate orders. In these cases, fees will be demanded for each order.

Article ; Online: Public perceptions on carbon removal from focus groups in 22 countries.

Low, Sean / Fritz, Livia / Baum, Chad M / Sovacool, Benjamin K

Nature communications

2024 Volume 15, Issue 1, Page(s) 3453

Abstract: Carbon removal is emerging as a pillar of governmental and industry commitments toward achieving Net Zero targets. Drawing from 44 focus groups in 22 countries, we map technical and societal issues that a representative sample of publics raise on five ... ...

Abstract	Carbon removal is emerging as a pillar of governmental and industry commitments toward achieving Net Zero targets. Drawing from 44 focus groups in 22 countries, we map technical and societal issues that a representative sample of publics raise on five major types of carbon removal (forests, soils, direct air capture, enhanced weathering, and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage), and how these translate to preferences for governance actors, mechanisms, and rationales. We assess gaps and overlaps between a global range of public perceptions and how carbon removal is currently emerging in assessment, innovation, and decision-making. In conclusion, we outline key societal expectations for informing assessment and policy: prioritize public engagement as more than acceptance research; scrutiny and regulation of industry beyond incentivizing innovation; systemic coordination across sectors, levels, and borders; and prioritize underlying causes of climate change and interrelated governance issues.
MeSH term(s)	Focus Groups ; Humans ; Carbon ; Public Opinion ; Climate Change ; Soil/chemistry ; Carbon Sequestration ; Female ; Male ; Adult
Chemical Substances	Carbon (7440-44-0) ; Soil
Language	English
Publishing date	2024-04-24
Publishing country	England
Document type	Journal Article ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
ZDB-ID	2553671-0
ISSN	2041-1723 ; 2041-1723
ISSN (online)	2041-1723
ISSN	2041-1723
DOI	10.1038/s41467-024-47853-w
Database	MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

Order via subito

Article: Actors, legitimacy, and governance challenges facing negative emissions and solar geoengineering technologies.

Sovacool, Benjamin K / Baum, Chad M / Cantoni, Roberto / Low, Sean

Environmental politics

2023 Volume 33, Issue 2, Page(s) 340–365

Abstract: Institutional theory, behavioral science, sociology and even political science all emphasize the importance of actors in achieving social change. Despite this salience, the actors involved in researching, promoting, or deploying negative emissions and ... ...

Abstract	Institutional theory, behavioral science, sociology and even political science all emphasize the importance of actors in achieving social change. Despite this salience, the actors involved in researching, promoting, or deploying negative emissions and solar geoengineering technologies remain underexplored within the literature. In this study, based on a rigorous sample of semi-structured expert interviews (
Language	English
Publishing date	2023-05-16
Publishing country	England
Document type	Journal Article
ISSN	0964-4016
ISSN	0964-4016
DOI	10.1080/09644016.2023.2210464
Database	MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

Your chosen title can be delivered directly to ZB MED Cologne location if you are registered as a user at ZB MED Cologne.

Article ; Online: Risk-risk governance in a low-carbon future: Exploring institutional, technological, and behavioral tradeoffs in climate geoengineering pathways.

Sovacool, Benjamin K / Baum, Chad M / Low, Sean

Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis

2022 Volume 43, Issue 4, Page(s) 838–859

Abstract: Deliberations are underway to utilize increasingly radical technological options to help address climate change and stabilize the climatic system. Collectively, these options are often referred to as "climate geoengineering." Deployment of such options, ... ...

Abstract	Deliberations are underway to utilize increasingly radical technological options to help address climate change and stabilize the climatic system. Collectively, these options are often referred to as "climate geoengineering." Deployment of such options, however, can create wicked tradeoffs in governance and require adaptive forms of risk management. In this study, we utilize a large and novel set of qualitative expert interview data to more deeply and systematically explore the types of risk-risk tradeoffs that may emerge from the use of 20 different climate geoengineering options, 10 that focus on carbon dioxide or greenhouse gas removal, and 10 that focus on solar radiation management and reflecting sunlight. We specifically consider: What risks does the deployment of these options entail? What types of tradeoffs may emerge through their deployment? We apply a framework that clusters risk-risk tradeoffs into institutional and governance, technological and environmental, and behavioral and temporal dimensions. In doing so, we offer a more complete inventory of risk-risk tradeoffs than those currently available within the respective risk-assessment, energy-systems, and climate-change literatures, and we also point the way toward future research gaps concerning policy, deployment, and risk management.
Language	English
Publishing date	2022-05-04
Publishing country	United States
Document type	Journal Article
ZDB-ID	778660-8
ISSN	1539-6924 ; 0272-4332
ISSN (online)	1539-6924
ISSN	0272-4332
DOI	10.1111/risa.13932
Database	MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

Full text online

Accessible to users with ZB MED library card

In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter

Zs.A 1900: Show issues

Location:
Je nach Verfügbarkeit (siehe Angabe bei Bestand)
bis Jg. 1994: Bestellungen von Artikeln über das Online-Bestellformular
Jg. 1995 - 2021: Lesesall (1.OG)
ab Jg. 2022: Lesesaal (EG)

Order via subito

Details ▾

Article ; Online: Determining our climate policy future: expert opinions about negative emissions and solar radiation management pathways.

Sovacool, Benjamin K / Baum, Chad M / Low, Sean

Mitigation and adaptation strategies for global change

2022 Volume 27, Issue 8, Page(s) 58

Abstract: Negative emissions technologies and solar radiation management techniques could contribute towards climate stability, either by removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and storing it permanently or reflecting sunlight away from the atmosphere. ... ...

Abstract	Negative emissions technologies and solar radiation management techniques could contribute towards climate stability, either by removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and storing it permanently or reflecting sunlight away from the atmosphere. Despite concerns about them, such options are increasingly being discussed as crucial complements to traditional climate change mitigation and adaptation. Expectations around negative emissions and solar radiation management and their associated risks and costs shape public and private discussions of how society deals with the climate crisis. In this study, we rely on a large expert survey (
Language	English
Publishing date	2022-10-03
Publishing country	Netherlands
Document type	Journal Article
ZDB-ID	2004169-X
ISSN	1573-1596 ; 1381-2386
ISSN (online)	1573-1596
ISSN	1381-2386
DOI	10.1007/s11027-022-10030-9
Database	MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

Full text online

Accessible to users with ZB MED library card

Order via subito

Details ▾
- Full text online
- Order with fees

Article: Rethinking Net-Zero systems, spaces, and societies: “Hard” versus “soft” alternatives for nature-based and engineered carbon removal

Low, Sean / Baum, Chad M. / Sovacool, Benjamin K.

Global environmental change. 2022 July, v. 75

2022

Abstract: Carbon removal – also known as negative emissions technologies, or greenhouse gas removal – represents a core pillar of post-Paris climate policy, signaling for enhancing and constructing carbon sinks to balance emissions sources on route to ambitious ... ...

Abstract	Carbon removal – also known as negative emissions technologies, or greenhouse gas removal – represents a core pillar of post-Paris climate policy, signaling for enhancing and constructing carbon sinks to balance emissions sources on route to ambitious temperature targets. We build on Amory Lovins’ “hard” and “soft” alternatives for energy pathways to illuminate how foundational experts, technologists, and policy entrepreneurs think about different modes of resource inputs, infrastructure and livelihoods, and decision-making, regarding ten nature-based and engineered carbon removal approaches. Based on 90 original interviews, we show that hard and soft paths reflect different conceptions of systems, spaces, and societal involvement. We highlight that pathways depend on diverging concepts of economies-of-scale (capturing carbon at the largest possible scale, versus catalyzing systemic co-benefits) and carbon management (a waste product within conventional climate governance, versus diverse end-uses and values to be diversely governed). Our analysis further emphasizes two key uncertainties: whether renewables can be upscaled to allow synergies rather than tradeoffs between carbon removal and more widespread energy demands, and whether carbon certification can expand spatially to navigate long supply chains, and conceptually to incentivize diverse co-benefits. Experts remain motivated by antecedent concerns over land-use management and extractive industries, and that exploitative systems will – without guardrails – be replicated by inertia.
Keywords	carbon ; certification ; climate ; decision making ; economies of scale ; energy ; environmental policy ; global change ; governance ; greenhouse gases ; infrastructure ; temperature
Language	English
Dates of publication	2022-07
Publishing place	Elsevier Ltd
Document type	Article
ZDB-ID	30436-0
ISSN	1056-9367 ; 0959-3780
ISSN	1056-9367 ; 0959-3780
DOI	10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102530
Database	NAL-Catalogue (AGRICOLA)

In stock of ZB MED Bonn / Germany

Z 5711: Show issues
Zs Allg GEC: Show issues
+ Gl 21: Show issues

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

Your chosen title can be delivered directly to ZB MED Cologne location if you are registered as a user at ZB MED Cologne.

Details ▾
- See ZB MED holdings
- Order with fees

Article ; Online: Beyond climate stabilization: Exploring the perceived sociotechnical co-impacts of carbon removal and solar geoengineering

Sovacool, Benjamin K. / Baum, Chad M. / Low, Sean

Ecological Economics. 2022 Oct. 13, p.107648-

2022 , Page(s) 107648–

Abstract: The scientific literature on the co-impacts of low-carbon energy systems—positive and negative side effects—has focused intently on climate mitigation, or climate adaptation. It has not systematically examined the prospective co-impacts of carbon removal ...

Abstract	The scientific literature on the co-impacts of low-carbon energy systems—positive and negative side effects—has focused intently on climate mitigation, or climate adaptation. It has not systematically examined the prospective co-impacts of carbon removal (or negative emissions) and solar geoengineering. Based on a large sample of diverse expert interviews (N = 125), and using a sociotechnical approach, in this study we identify 107 perceived co-impacts related to the deployment of carbon removal and solar geoengineering technologies. Slightly less than half (52) were identified as positive co-impacts (38 for carbon removal, 14 for solar geoengineering), whereas slightly more than half (55) were identified as negative co-impacts (31 for carbon removal, 24 for solar geoengineering). We then discuss 20 of these co-impacts in more depth, including positive co-impacts for nature-based protection, the expansion of industry, and reduction of poverty or heat stress as well as negative co-impacts for water insecurity, moral hazard, limited social acceptance and path dependence. After presenting this body of evidence, the paper then discusses and theorizes these co-impacts more deeply in terms of four areas: relationality and risk-risk trade-offs, co-deployment and coupling, intentional or unintentional implications, and expert consensus and dissensus. It concludes with more general insights for energy and climate research, and policy.
Keywords	carbon ; climate ; ecological economics ; energy ; environmental engineering ; heat stress ; industry ; issues and policy ; poverty ; Negative emissions ; Net-zero emissions ; Carbon dioxide removal ; Greenhouse gas removal ; Solar radiation management ; Climate justice
Language	English
Dates of publication	2022-1013
Publishing place	Elsevier B.V.
Document type	Article ; Online
Note	Pre-press version ; Use and reproduction
ISSN	0921-8009
DOI	10.1016/j.ecolecon.2022.107648
Database	NAL-Catalogue (AGRICOLA)

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

Your chosen title can be delivered directly to ZB MED Cologne location if you are registered as a user at ZB MED Cologne.

Article: Undone science in climate interventions: Contrasting and contesting anticipatory assessments by expert networks

Low, Sean / Baum, Chad M. / Sovacool, Benjamin K.

Environmental science & policy. 2022 Nov., v. 137

2022

Abstract: In global climate governance, anticipatory assessments map future options and pathways, in light of prospective risks and uncertainties, to inform present-day planning. Using data from 125 interviews, we ask: How are foundational experts contesting the ... ...

Abstract	In global climate governance, anticipatory assessments map future options and pathways, in light of prospective risks and uncertainties, to inform present-day planning. Using data from 125 interviews, we ask: How are foundational experts contesting the conduct of anticipatory assessment of carbon removal and solar geoengineering – as two emerging but controversial strategies for engaging with climate change and achieving Net Zero targets? We find that efforts at carbon removal and solar geoengineering assessment leverage and challenge systems modeling that has become dominant in mapping and communicating future climate impacts and mitigation strategies via IPCC reports. Both suites of climate intervention have become stress-tests for the capacity of modeling to assess socio-technical strategies with complex, systemic dimensions. Meanwhile, exploring societal dimensions demands new modes of disciplinary expertise, qualitative and deliberative practices, and stakeholder inclusion that modelling processes struggle to incorporate. Finally, we discuss how the patterns of expert contestation identified in our results speak to multiple fault-lines within ongoing debates on reforming global environmental assessments, and highlights key open questions to be addressed.
Keywords	carbon ; climate ; climate change ; environmental engineering ; environmental science ; governance ; issues and policy ; stakeholders
Language	English
Dates of publication	2022-11
Size	p. 249-270.
Publishing place	Elsevier Ltd
Document type	Article
ZDB-ID	1454687-5
ISSN	1462-9011
ISSN	1462-9011
DOI	10.1016/j.envsci.2022.08.026
Database	NAL-Catalogue (AGRICOLA)

In stock of ZB MED Bonn / Germany

Z 7104: Show issues

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

Your chosen title can be delivered directly to ZB MED Cologne location if you are registered as a user at ZB MED Cologne.

Details ▾
- See ZB MED holdings
- Order with fees

Article: Turning your weakness into my strength: How counter-messaging on conventional meat influences acceptance of cultured meat

Baum, Chad M. / Verbeke, Wim / De Steur, Hans

Food quality and preference. 2022 Apr., v. 97

2022

Abstract: With cultured meat now available for purchase in Singapore and more countries expected to follow soon, more and more research has explored the impact of particular individual factors and information provision. To this point, no research has looked ... ...

Abstract	With cultured meat now available for purchase in Singapore and more countries expected to follow soon, more and more research has explored the impact of particular individual factors and information provision. To this point, no research has looked explicitly at a counter-messaging approach, whereby problems of conventional meat production are leveraged to make the case for cultured meat. This study employs a 3x1 randomized experimental design with a sample of 302 British adults where participants are provided one of two differently focused counter-messages (animal welfare or environmental impact) or a control text. The study utilizes two repeated measures (before and after information provision) to examine the change in acceptance and investigate related informational effects. Though we find the focus of counter-messaging makes no difference, such an approach does generally promote consumer acceptance. Whereas acceptance of cultured meat is higher among men, younger consumers, and those who eat meat more often, change in acceptance is predicted by perceived consumer effectiveness and, marginally, lack of prior knowledge. By demonstrating the potential of a counter-messaging approach and offering a first examination of determinants of change in acceptance, this research should prove useful for researchers, policymakers, and proponents planning for the ongoing development and marketing of cultured meat.
Keywords	Singapore ; animal welfare ; consumer acceptance ; cultured meat ; environmental impact ; experimental design ; food quality ; meat ; meat production
Language	English
Dates of publication	2022-04
Publishing place	Elsevier Ltd
Document type	Article
ZDB-ID	1020221-3
ISSN	0950-3293
ISSN	0950-3293
DOI	10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104485
Database	NAL-Catalogue (AGRICOLA)

In stock of ZB MED Bonn / Germany

Z 5074: Show issues

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

Your chosen title can be delivered directly to ZB MED Cologne location if you are registered as a user at ZB MED Cologne.

Details ▾
- See ZB MED holdings
- Order with fees

Article ; Online: Determining our climate policy future: expert opinions about negative emissions and solar radiation management pathways

Sovacool, Benjamin K. / Baum, Chad M. / Low, Sean

Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change. 2022 Dec., v. 27, no. 8 p.58-58

2022

Abstract	Negative emissions technologies and solar radiation management techniques could contribute towards climate stability, either by removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and storing it permanently or reflecting sunlight away from the atmosphere. Despite concerns about them, such options are increasingly being discussed as crucial complements to traditional climate change mitigation and adaptation. Expectations around negative emissions and solar radiation management and their associated risks and costs shape public and private discussions of how society deals with the climate crisis. In this study, we rely on a large expert survey (N = 74) to critically examine the future potential of both negative emission options (e.g., carbon dioxide removal) and solar radiation management techniques. We designed a survey process that asked a pool of prominent experts questions about (i) the necessity of adopting negative emissions or solar radiation management options, (ii) the desirability of such options when ranked against each other, (iii) estimations of future efficacy in terms of temperature reductions achieved or gigatons of carbon removed, (iv) expectations about future scaling, commercialization, and deployment targets, and (v) potential risks and barriers. Unlike other elicitation processes where experts are more positive or have high expectations about novel options, our results are more critical and cautionary. We find that some options (notably afforestation and reforestation, ecosystem restoration, and soil carbon sequestration) are envisioned frequently as necessary, desirable, feasible, and affordable, with minimal risks and barriers (compared to other options). This contrasts with other options envisaged as unnecessary risky or costly, notably ocean alkalization or fertilization, space-based reflectors, high-altitude sunshades, and albedo management via clouds. Moreover, only the options of afforestation and reforestation and soil carbon sequestration are expected to be widely deployed before 2035, which raise very real concerns about climate and energy policy in the near- to mid-term.
Keywords	alkalinization ; altitude ; carbon ; carbon dioxide ; carbon sequestration ; climate ; climate change ; commercialization ; ecological restoration ; energy policy ; environmental engineering ; environmental policy ; reforestation ; society ; solar radiation ; surveys ; temperature
Language	English
Dates of publication	2022-12
Size	p. 58.
Publishing place	Springer Netherlands
Document type	Article ; Online
ZDB-ID	2004169-X
ISSN	1573-1596 ; 1381-2386
ISSN (online)	1573-1596
ISSN	1381-2386
DOI	10.1007/s11027-022-10030-9
Database	NAL-Catalogue (AGRICOLA)

Order via subito

To top

More links

Kategorien

Order via subito

More links

Kategorien

Order via subito

More links

Kategorien

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

Full text online

More links

Kategorien

In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter

Order via subito

Full text online

More links

Kategorien

Order via subito

More links

Kategorien

In stock of ZB MED Bonn / Germany

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

More links

Kategorien

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

More links

Kategorien

In stock of ZB MED Bonn / Germany

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

More links

Kategorien

In stock of ZB MED Bonn / Germany

Order via subito

Inter-library loan at ZB MED

More links

Kategorien

Order via subito