ArticleNature communications2024
Public perceptions on carbon removal from focus groups in 22 countries.
Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Large-Scale Carbon Removal Will Create Public Health, Economic, and Climate Trade-Offs.Environmental science & technology · 2026Article
- Public support for novel carbon removal hinges on procedural and distributive fairness.Nature climate change · 2026Article
- Identifying priority zones for carbon management in the Central Yunnan agglomeration.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- An ecosystem of carbon dioxide removal reviews - part 1: direct air COEnergy & environmental science · 2025Review
- Who pays for carbon dioxide removal? Public perceptions of risk and fairness of enhanced rock weathering in the UK.Humanities & social sciences communications · 2025Article
- Leveraging ecosystems responses to enhanced rock weathering in mitigation scenarios.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Carbon removal support is tempered by concerns over whether biological methods are worth it.Communications earth & environment · 2025Article
- Exploring global climate intervention experiments: sociotechnical promises, innovation dynamics, and perceived co-impacts across 20 projects and pilots.Sustainability science · 2025Article
- Review of Economics and Policies of Carbon Dioxide Removal.Current sustainable/renewable energy reports · 2025Review
- Partisanship overcomes framing in shaping solar geoengineering perceptions: Evidence from a conjoint experiment.npj climate action · 2025Article
- Carbon removal beyond the trees.Communications earth & environment · 2025Article
- Review
- Demographics shape public preferences for carbon dioxide removal and solar geoengineering interventions across 30 countries.Communications earth & environment · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Carbon removal is emerging as a pillar of governmental and industry commitments toward achieving Net Zero targets. Drawing from 44 focus groups in 22 countries, we map technical and societal issues that a representative sample of publics raise on five major types of carbon removal (forests, soils, direct air capture, enhanced weathering, and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage), and how these translate to preferences for governance actors, mechanisms, and rationales. We assess gaps and overlaps between a global range of public perceptions and how carbon removal is currently emerging in assessment, innovation, and decision-making. In conclusion, we outline key societal expectations for informing assessment and policy: prioritize public engagement as more than acceptance research; scrutiny and regulation of industry beyond incentivizing innovation; systemic coordination across sectors, levels, and borders; and prioritize underlying causes of climate change and interrelated governance issues.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.