Public perceptions of climate geoengineering: a systematic review of the literature

Geoengineering is a set of proposed large-scale technological fixes designed to curb anthropogenic climate change mostly through the reduction or neutralization of greenhouse gas emissions. While this set of technologies may provide significant benefit to future society, it may also be controversial for a variety of reasons including values-based objections and uncertainties regarding the manageability and potential irreversibility of the technologies. Studies of public perceptions of geoengineering have begun to elicit responses to these proposed technologies, yet the findings of such work are scattered across many publications, and represent the work of a variety of scholars using many methods to collect data. This work provides a systematic review of empirical literature regarding the methods and results of public perception studies of 2 distinct geoengineering approaches: carbon dioxide removal and solar radiation management. Reviewing public opinion data regarding these sets of technologies can provide a stronger basis of understanding that can empower anticipatory governance initiatives, future decision-making, and risk communication. We do not analyze public opinion studies regarding carbon dioxide capture and storage, as other reviews have been recently published elsewhere. Four key themes are identified and reviewed across studies: (1) support for research and use of geoengineering, (2) risk and benefit perceptions, (3) familiarity with geoengineering, and (4) trust in governing bodies. This review also discusses methodological issues pertaining to participant sampling and framing of geo-engineering technologies within the reviewed studies.