Beliefs and values explain international differences in perception of solar radiation management: insights from a cross-country survey

Abstract

Solar radiation management (SRM) aims to counteract the negative consequences of global warming and is considered for deployment in the event that mitigation and adaptation efforts appear insufficient. However, because the potential ecological and political side effects of SRM are not well understood, and because SRM will cross national boundaries, an international research perspective on the general public's perception of this technology is required. We conducted an online survey on the general public's perception and acceptance of SRM in Canada, China, Germany, Switzerland, the UK, and the USA. Our findings confirmed the need for an international perspective, as we found several cross-country differences. Chinese respondents, for example, indicated greater acceptance for SRM than their North American and European counterparts. Moreover, results of regression analyses on acceptance of SRM by country revealed that lower acceptability ratings for SRM in Canada and Europe were mostly related to stronger beliefs that SRM tampers with nature. Chinese respondents, by contrast, were more accepting of SRM when they held stronger beliefs that it may reduce the motivation to adopt burdensome climate change mitigation efforts. Although our researchand previous studies-suggest that opposition to SRM remains, dismissing the technology entirely on these grounds and without conducting a careful, cross-national, and Climatic Change transdisciplinary decision-support process to set up an international policy regime seems premature as people from countries that are less prepared to mitigate and adapt to climate change seem to be more supportive of SRM.

Tampering with Nature: A Systematic Review

“…Only a few comparisons between countries have been made related to tampering with nature or related constructs (Bredahl, 2001; Dragojlovic & Einsiedel, 2013b; Gaskell et al., 2000; Macer, 1994; Macer et al., 1995; Visschers et al., 2017), and no clear or consistent pattern in the perception of tampering with nature between countries has been described.…”

“…Tampering with nature was also measured by providing tampering with nature as a reason as to why one does not agree with a certain technology on a multiple‐choice scale ( n = 6) or by asking participants to indicate to which extent they believe that a technology is tampering with nature ( n = 4). Multiple articles measured specific tampering with nature directly with one or two items ( n = 9), for example, with the item, “Genetic testing is tampering with nature” (Henneman, Timmermans, & Van Der Wal, 2006), while other articles used three to nine items to measure specific tampering with nature ( n = 19) (Frewer et al., 2002; Gaskell et al., 2000; Ghasemi et al., 2013; Sjöberg, 2000b; Visschers et al., 2017). Thus, the operationalization of the specific measure of tampering with nature varies greatly between studies.…”

“…The perception that a certain technology or behavior tampers with nature is found in various fields, such as genetically modified food (Subrahmanyan & Cheng, 2000), geoengineering technologies (Macnaghten & Szerszynski, 2013), reproductive technologies (Ecklund, Peifer, White, & Chan, 2017), and animal biotechnology (McNeil & Williams, 2002). The perception of tampering with nature has also been shown to be a strong predictor of the acceptance of new technologies, such as solar radiation management (Merk, Pönitzsch, Kniebes, Rehdanz, & Schmidt, 2015; Visschers, Shi, Siegrist, & Arvai, 2017). Moreover, tampering with nature has been shown to have a strong influence on the risk perception of various technologies and behaviors (Visschers et al., 2017), and has been shown to have more predictive power in risk perception of technologies than other more traditional psychometric variables such as dreaded or unknown risks (Sjöberg, 2000b).…”

“…The perception of tampering with nature has also been shown to be a strong predictor of the acceptance of new technologies, such as solar radiation management (Merk, Pönitzsch, Kniebes, Rehdanz, & Schmidt, 2015; Visschers, Shi, Siegrist, & Arvai, 2017). Moreover, tampering with nature has been shown to have a strong influence on the risk perception of various technologies and behaviors (Visschers et al., 2017), and has been shown to have more predictive power in risk perception of technologies than other more traditional psychometric variables such as dreaded or unknown risks (Sjöberg, 2000b). Thus, understanding what tampering with nature is and when a behavior or technology is perceived as such enables us to predict and possibly influence the risk perception and acceptance of certain behaviors and technologies.…”

Unintended Side Effects of Digital Transition: Perspectives of Japanese Experts

“…Previous studies have demonstrated cultural factors for the variegated perceptions of emerging technologies (e.g., [47] for genetically modified food; [48] for nanotechnology; [49] for geoengineering) as well as digital technologies, particularly for robots [50,51]. One study [52] showed how, even among experts, religious views have an effect on the developmental pathways of robots and artificial intelligence in Japan and the United States, with the Japanese demonstrating a preference for humanoid robots over other forms of artificial intelligence (without a body).…”