Literature DB >> 26729883

Using decision pathway surveys to inform climate engineering policy choices.

Robin Gregory1, Terre Satterfield2, Ariel Hasell3.   

Abstract

Over the coming decades citizens living in North America and Europe will be asked about a variety of new technological and behavioral initiatives intended to mitigate the worst impacts of climate change. A common approach to public input has been surveys whereby respondents' attitudes about climate change are explained by individuals' demographic background, values, and beliefs. In parallel, recent deliberative research seeks to more fully address the complex value tradeoffs linked to novel technologies and difficult ethical questions that characterize leading climate mitigation alternatives. New methods such as decision pathway surveys may offer important insights for policy makers by capturing much of the depth and reasoning of small-group deliberations while meeting standard survey goals including large-sample stakeholder engagement. Pathway surveys also can help participants to deepen their factual knowledge base and arrive at a more complete understanding of their own values as they apply to proposed policy alternatives. The pathway results indicate more fully the conditional and context-specific nature of support for several "upstream" climate interventions, including solar radiation management techniques and carbon dioxide removal technologies.

Entities:  

Keywords:  climate change; deliberation; geoengineering; pathway surveys

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26729883      PMCID: PMC4725466          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1508896113

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  7 in total

Review 1.  Deliberations about deliberative methods: issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes.

Authors:  Julia Abelson; Pierre-Gerlier Forest; John Eyles; Patricia Smith; Elisabeth Martin; Francois-Pierre Gauvin
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 4.634

Review 2.  Sensitive questions in surveys.

Authors:  Roger Tourangeau; Ting Yan
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 17.737

3.  Deliberative disjunction: expert and public understanding of outcome uncertainty.

Authors:  Robin Gregory; Nathan Dieckmann; Ellen Peters; Lee Failing; Graham Long; Martin Tusler
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2012-05-07       Impact factor: 4.000

4.  Bringing values and deliberation to science communication.

Authors:  Thomas Dietz
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-08-12       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Solution aversion: On the relation between ideology and motivated disbelief.

Authors:  Troy H Campbell; Aaron C Kay
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2014-11

6.  Policy: Start research on climate engineering.

Authors:  Jane C S Long; Frank Loy; M Granger Morgan
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2015-02-05       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  Creating a national citizen engagement process for energy policy.

Authors:  Nick Pidgeon; Christina Demski; Catherine Butler; Karen Parkhill; Alexa Spence
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-09-15       Impact factor: 11.205

  7 in total
  2 in total

1.  Reframing climate change assessments around risk: recommendations for the US National Climate Assessment.

Authors:  C P Weaver; R H Moss; K L Ebi; P H Gleick; P C Stern; C Tebaldi; R S Wilson; J L Arvai
Journal:  Environ Res Lett       Date:  2017-07-21       Impact factor: 6.947

2.  Social comfort zones for transformative conservation decisions in a changing climate.

Authors:  Shannon Hagerman; Terre Satterfield; Sara Nawaz; Guillaume Peterson St-Laurent; Robert Kozak; Robin Gregory
Journal:  Conserv Biol       Date:  2021-09-29       Impact factor: 7.563

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.