People/social

This page is in beta draft.

As CDR projects are being developed, they will interact with communities and society – in fields, forests, towns and cities. Therefore it is vital that we consider people’s opinions, their attitudes, and their reactions to GGR proposals. We know that public attitudes are crucial for the ethical and effective development of new technologies – for example, that they are safe, and are developed in a responsible way. This dimension tests GGR proposals according to their impact on people and society. Importantly, we know that different people might react in different ways. Therefore we include indicators which show which types of proposal different people might prefer, depending on their values or ‘worldview’. The assessment is designed to enable innovators to spot areas in which a project might encounter societal risks, so that action can be taken.

Our people/social indicators

Social readiness

From the existing research on public attitudes to innovation, we can identify a set of commonly shared beliefs and values about climate innovations. These are known to be typically less susceptible to change across different situations. They can be used to flag technology characteristics or modes of implementation which are associated with more positive or negative perceptions.

Overall “social readiness” can be viewed through four broad buckets of risk, each of which encompasses a specific body of knowledge about societal considerations:

Psychometric risk factors

These indicators derive from the psychometric approaches to the psychology of risk perception, notably the work of Baruch Fischhoff, Paul Slovic, and Vince Covello and their colleagues. Key factors influencing risk perceptions are ‘dread’ perceptions, uncertainty, and stigma.

Inflexibility indicators

These are derived from approaches to the sociology of technology, notably Paul Collingridge, whose ‘control dilemma’ states that it is usually difficult or impossible to know what the impacts of a new technology will be, and by the time they are known, lock-in has often occurred. Therefore, a key factor in social readiness is the degree of flexibility of a technology or organisation.

Responsibility indicators

These include issues that could affect the degree of responsibility of the research, development, demonstration, and deployment, derived from relational approaches to science and technology studies, notably work by Jack Stilgoe, Phil Macnaghten, Rob Bellamy, and their colleagues.

Socio-cultural preference

People are heterogeneous, and CDR interest and acceptance can vary depending on their worldview. This dimension stems from the work on ‘cultural theory’ developed by Mary Douglas, Steve Rayner, Robin Cantor, Michiel Schwarz and Michael Thompson, which posits that three ideal-type cultures exist in society: hierarchical, individualist and egalitarian. Unlike the social readiness indicators, which propose generic indicators to be applied across a population, these indicators consider the different ways in which CDRs appeal (or not) to different social groups.

Measurement approach for social indicators

Your content goes here. Edit or remove this text inline or in the module Content settings. You can also style every aspect of this content in the module Design settings and even apply custom CSS to this text in the module Advanced settings.

We identified a long list of potential indicators for the ‘social’ dimension, from various bodies of literature on different types of technologies and organisations. From the long list, we selected indicators applicable to CDRs and to demonstration projects.

Empirical work in the field of public perceptions of CDR, and of analogous areas such as CCS, has also identified several factors influencing public perceptions, such as ‘naturalness’, ‘justice’ and ‘co-benefits’. Another important factor is public trust; however, rather than an indicator in its own right, this is best thought of as an overarching principle which informs several of the indicators in the table.

We converted the indicators list into a questionnaire, shown below. The questions are designed to enable identification of areas in which a project might encounter such risks, so that innovators can take action.

	Dimension	Indicator	Question	Scoring
1	Psychometric	Familiarity	Does the proposal use any materials which might be considered unfamiliar?	Y=0
				N=1
				No data=X
1b			Please explain the reasons for your choice	Open-ended
2	Psychometric	Voluntariness	Will members of the public be involved in decisions to deploy?	Y=1
				N=0
				No data=X
2b			Please explain the reasons for your choice, including how you have defined ‘the public’	Open-ended
3	Psychometric	Observability	Does the proposal involve visible infrastructure at large scale, visible land-use changes, or create aesthetic impacts?	Y=0
				N=1
				No data=X
3b			Please explain the reasons for your choice	Open-ended
4	Psychometric	Catastrophic potential	Does the proposal have any risk (even small) of catastrophic impacts (i.e. involving or causing a sudden disaster), or risk to life?	Y=0
				N=1
				No data=X
4b			Please explain the reasons for your choice, including how you have defined ‘catastrophic’ in relation to your specific proposal or area of study	Open-ended
5	Inflexibility	Capital intensity	Does your innovation require large amounts of capital investment and/or capital cost subsidy?	Y=0
				N=1
				No data=X
5b			Please explain the reasons for your choice	Open-ended
6	Inflexibility	Lead times	Does the proposal require new infrastructure or substantial changes to existing infrastructure with a long lead time?	Y=0
				N=1
				No data=X
6b			Please explain the reasons for your choice	Open-ended
7	Inflexibility	Irreversibility	Does the proposal release material into the environment?	Y=0
				N=1
				No data=X
7b			Please explain the reasons for your choice	Open-ended
8	Inflexibility	Co-benefits	Does the proposal have a narrow focus on a single mission, for example to remove GHGs?	Y=0
				N=1
				No data=X
8b			Please explain the reasons for your choice	Open-ended
9	Responsibility	Distribution of risks	Are the risks of the proposal shared equitably amongst affected parties?	Y=1
				N=0
				No data=X
9b			Please explain the reasons for your choice, including how you have defined ‘affected parties’	Open-ended
10	Responsibility	Distribution of benefits	Are the benefits, including co-benefits, shared equitably amongst the affected parties?	Y=1
				N=0
				No data=X
10b			Please explain the reasons for your choice, including definition of ‘affected parties’	Open-ended
11	Responsibility	Procedural justice	Are members of the public involved in shaping the research, development, demonstration and deployment of the project?	Y=1
				N=0
				No data=X
11b			Please explain the reasons for your choice, including how you have defined ‘the public’	Open-ended
12	Responsibility	Naturalness	Might the processes involved be perceived by communities or the general public as ‘unnatural’?	Y=0
				N=1
				No data=X
12b			Please explain the reasons for your choice	Open-ended
13	Socio-cultural	Who benefits?	What is the primary benefit of the project? A) meets government targets and regulations; B) generates wealth; C) creates environmental co-benefits	A, B, C
				No data=X
13b			Please explain the reasons for your choice	Open-ended
14	Socio-cultural	Who implements?	Who would most likely be the main actor involved in implementing this proposal if upscaled? A) government; B) private companies; C) local communities	A, B, C
				No data=X
14b			Please explain the reasons for your choice	Open-ended
15	Socio-cultural	Who loses?	Who is most at risk in the event of failure? A) public/state institutions; B) market actors (investors, profit-making entities); C) local or indigenous communities, or the environment	A, B, C
				No data=X
15b			Please explain the reasons for your choice, including how you have defined ‘failure’	Open-ended
16	Socio-cultural	How fast?	On what timescale would the project be ready for deployment at scale? A) Longer-term; B) When the proposal is ready for market; C) Very soon	A, B, C
				No data=X
16b			Please explain the reasons for your choice	Open-ended
17	Socio-cultural	What infrastructure?	What sort of infrastructure, physical assets or physical changes would be involved? A) Long-lasting; B) Rapidly-replaceable; C) Landscape-enhancing	A, B, C
				No data=X
17b			Please explain the reasons for your

↵ Return to Evaluation Framework homepage.