Rethinking carbon dioxide removal: a justice-centred analysis of CDR perspectives research

3 views
Skip to first unread message

Geoengineering News

unread,
2:26 PM (7 hours ago) 2:26 PM
to CarbonDiox...@googlegroups.com
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14693062.2026.2648761#abstract

Authors: Delaney Pues, Anna Bridel, Valeria Cuevas, Zachary Dove & Sikina Jinnah

26 March 2026

Abstract
This study reviews 177 carbon dioxide removal (CDR) perspectives studies published between 2002 and 2025 through a justice-centred lens. Focusing on who is included, who produces the research, what questions are asked, and what methods are used, we show that: perspectives research remains dominated by researchers and participants in the Global North; prioritizes studies aimed at measuring support for CDR; limits opportunities for expressing dissent; and relies heavily on a narrow range of methods that minimize marginalized voices and place-based perspectives. We propose three key pathways to advance more effective, inclusive, and just practices: greater inclusion of vulnerable populations in the study design and participation; pursuing lines of inquiry that centre justice and prioritize the material needs and interests of vulnerable groups; and ensuring that CDR researchers reflect on internal biases that impact the particular approaches, framings, and assumptions shaping CDR futures.

Key policy insights
Policymakers should prioritize funding and support for CDR research that actively includes vulnerable communities in study design and participation, ensuring that decision-making processes reflect those most impacted by climate change and potential CDR impacts.

Policy frameworks should encourage research that goes beyond measuring levels of public acceptance to focus on justice-centred questions, such as how community engagement could be approached, particularly for vulnerable communities.

Policymakers can incentivize CDR researchers to adopt reflective practices that critically examine their assumptions, framings, and methods to reduce bias, diversify perspectives, and foster more democratic and just governance of CDR.

Source: Taylor & Francis 
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages