The influence of learning about carbon dioxide removal (CDR) on support for mitigation policies
Victoria Campbell-Arvai (),
P. Sol Hart,
Kaitlin T. Raimi and
Kimberly S. Wolske
Additional contact information
Victoria Campbell-Arvai: University of Michigan
P. Sol Hart: University of Michigan
Kaitlin T. Raimi: University of Michigan
Kimberly S. Wolske: University of Michigan
Climatic Change, 2017, vol. 143, issue 3, No 4, 336 pages
Abstract:
Abstract A wide range of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) strategies has been proposed to address climate change. As most CDR strategies are unfamiliar to the public, it is unknown how increased media and policy attention on CDR might affect public sentiment about climate change. On the one hand, CDR poses a potential moral hazard: if people perceive that CDR solves climate change, they may be less likely to support efforts to reduce carbon emissions. On the other hand, the need for CDR may increase the perceived severity of climate change and, thus, increase support for other types of mitigation. Using an online survey of US adults (N = 984), we tested these competing hypotheses by exposing participants to information about different forms of CDR. We find that learning about certain CDR strategies indirectly reduces support for mitigation policies by reducing the perceived threat of climate change. This was found to be true for participants who read about CDR in general (without mention of specific strategies), bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, or direct air capture. Furthermore, this risk compensation pattern was more pronounced among political conservatives than liberals—although in some cases, was partially offset by positive direct effects. Learning about reforestation, by contrast, had no indirect effects on mitigation support through perceived threat but was found to directly increase support among conservatives. The results suggest caution is warranted when promoting technological fixes to climate change, like CDR, as some forms may further dampen support for climate change action among the unengaged.
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (16)
Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-017-2005-1 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:climat:v:143:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s10584-017-2005-1
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/10584
DOI: 10.1007/s10584-017-2005-1
Access Statistics for this article
Climatic Change is currently edited by M. Oppenheimer and G. Yohe
More articles in Climatic Change from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().