IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cam/camdae/1610.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

It’s the Society, Stupid! Communicating Emergent Climate Technologies in the Internet Age

Author

Listed:
  • Olaf Corry
  • David Reiner

Abstract

Emergent or unproven technologies occupy a central role in post-Paris debates about climate change goals and their feasibility. New technologies have often faced major political and social challenges and the way they are communicated is changing as technical experts and scientists play a greater role in communicating directly online. We review the scope and key characteristics of communications on carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) technologies presenting data from a comprehensive survey of websites compiled to assess the state of global CCS communications. Our key empirical finding is that existing communications are techno-centric in their framing, overlooking economic, political and institutional aspects of CCS as a societal arrangement. We also find an overrepresentation of traditionally less trusted actors from business and government (resulting in a pro-CCS bias), rather than by independent academic researchers or NGOs. We offer some recommendations for how CCS and similarly emergent climate technologies might be better communicated in the age of the Internet, not just in terms of their technical features but also in terms of their societal impacts and the role they might play in a wider social and political context.

Suggested Citation

  • Olaf Corry & David Reiner, 2016. "It’s the Society, Stupid! Communicating Emergent Climate Technologies in the Internet Age," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1610, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    • Handle: RePEc:cam:camdae:1610
    Note: dmr40
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/research-files/repec/cam/pdf/cwpe1610.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kevin Anderson, 2015. "Talks in the city of light generate more heat," Nature, Nature, vol. 528(7583), pages 437-437, December.
    2. Sengers, F. & Raven, R.P.J.M. & Van Venrooij, A., 2010. "From riches to rags: Biofuels, media discourses, and resistance to sustainable energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5013-5027, September.
    3. Huijts, Nicole M.A. & Midden, Cees J.H. & Meijnders, Anneloes L., 2007. "Social acceptance of carbon dioxide storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2780-2789, May.
    4. David M. Reiner, 2016. "Learning through a portfolio of carbon capture and storage demonstration projects," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 1(1), pages 1-7, January.
    5. Gough, Clair & O׳Keefe, Laura & Mander, Sarah, 2014. "Public perceptions of CO2 transportation in pipelines," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 106-114.
    6. Kendall Powell, 2013. "Science communication: From page to screen," Nature, Nature, vol. 494(7436), pages 271-273, February.
    7. Hulme,Mike, 2009. "Why We Disagree about Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521727327, September.
    8. Unknown, 2014. "Media Coverage 2014," 2014: Ethics, Efficiency and Food Security: Feeding the 9 Billion, Well, 26-28 August 2014 225573, Crawford Fund.
    9. Heras-Saizarbitoria, Iñaki & Cilleruelo, Ernesto & Zamanillo, Ibon, 2011. "Public acceptance of renewables and the media: an analysis of the Spanish PV solar experience," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(9), pages 4685-4696.
    10. Sabine Fuss & Josep G. Canadell & Glen P. Peters & Massimo Tavoni & Robbie M. Andrew & Philippe Ciais & Robert B. Jackson & Chris D. Jones & Florian Kraxner & Nebosja Nakicenovic & Corinne Le Quéré & , 2014. "Betting on negative emissions," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(10), pages 850-853, October.
    11. Haas, Peter M., 1992. "Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 1-35, January.
    12. Hulme,Mike, 2009. "Why We Disagree about Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521898690, September.
    13. Anne-Maree Dowd & Peta Ashworth & Michelle Rodriguez & Talia Jeanneret, 2012. "CCS in the Media: An Analysis of International Coverage," Energy & Environment, , vol. 23(2-3), pages 283-298, May.
    14. Shackley, Simon & Waterman, Holly & Godfroij, Per & Reiner, David & Anderson, Jason & Draxlbauer, Kathy & Flach, Todd, 2007. "Stakeholder perceptions of CO2 capture and storage in Europe: Results from a survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 5091-5108, October.
    15. Boudet, Hilary & Clarke, Christopher & Bugden, Dylan & Maibach, Edward & Roser-Renouf, Connie & Leiserowitz, Anthony, 2014. "“Fracking” controversy and communication: Using national survey data to understand public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 57-67.
    16. David M. Reiner, 2008. "A Looming Rhetorical Gap: A Survey of Public Communications Activities For Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Technologies," Working Papers EPRG 0801, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    17. Adler, Emanuel & Haas, Peter M., 1992. "Conclusion: epistemic communities, world order, and the creation of a reflective research program," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 367-390, January.
    18. David M. Reiner, 2015. "Where can I go to see one? Risk communications for an 'imaginary technology'," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(6), pages 710-713, June.
    19. C. Weiler & Jason Keller & Christina Olex, 2012. "Personality type differences between Ph.D. climate researchers and the general public: implications for effective communication," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 112(2), pages 233-242, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Arning, K. & Offermann-van Heek, J. & Linzenich, A. & Kaetelhoen, A. & Sternberg, A. & Bardow, A. & Ziefle, M., 2019. "Same or different? Insights on public perception and acceptance of carbon capture and storage or utilization in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 235-249.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zeigermann, Ulrike & Böcher, Michael, 2020. "Challenges for bridging the gap between knowledge and governance in sustainability policy – The case of OECD ‘Focal Points’ for Policy Coherence for Development," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    2. Rolf Lidskog & Göran Sundqvist, 2015. "When Does Science Matter? International Relations Meets Science and Technology Studies," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, February.
    3. Laurie Waller & Tim Rayner & Jason Chilvers & Clair Amanda Gough & Irene Lorenzoni & Andrew Jordan & Naomi Vaughan, 2020. "Contested framings of greenhouse gas removal and its feasibility: Social and political dimensions," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), July.
    4. Setiawan, Andri D. & Cuppen, Eefje, 2013. "Stakeholder perspectives on carbon capture and storage in Indonesia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1188-1199.
    5. Andreas Bjurström & Merritt Polk, 2011. "Climate change and interdisciplinarity: a co-citation analysis of IPCC Third Assessment Report," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 525-550, June.
    6. Cynthia Couette, 2024. "Epistemic competition in global governance: The case of pharmaceutical patents," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 15(3), pages 516-527, June.
    7. Janet Judy McIntyre‐Mills, 2013. "Anthropocentrism and Well‐being: A Way Out of the Lobster Pot?," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 136-155, March.
    8. Friederike Hartz, 2024. "“We are not droids”– IPCC participants’ senses of responsibility and affective experiences across the production, assessment, communication and enactment of climate science," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(6), pages 1-21, June.
    9. Hall, C. Michael & Amelung, Bas & Cohen, Scott & Eijgelaar, Eke & Gössling, Stefan & Higham, James & Leemans, Rik & Peeters, Paul & Ram, Yael & Scott, Daniel & Aall, Carlo & Abegg, Bruno & Araña, Jorg, 2015. "No time for smokescreen skepticism: A rejoinder to Shani and Arad," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 341-347.
    10. Nancy Menning, 2018. "Narrating climate change as a rite of passage," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 343-353, March.
    11. Mercedes Bleda & Elisabeth Krull & Jonatan Pinkse & Eleni Christodoulou, 2023. "Organizational heuristics and firms' sensemaking for climate change adaptation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(8), pages 6124-6137, December.
    12. Chhetri, Netra & Ghimire, Rajiv & Wagner, Melissa & Wang, Meng, 2020. "Global citizen deliberation: Case of world-wide views on climate and energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    13. Hochachka, Gail, 2021. "Integrating the four faces of climate change adaptation: Towards transformative change in Guatemalan coffee communities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    14. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2015. "An Evaluation of the Treatment of Risk and Uncertainties in the IPCC Reports on Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 701-712, April.
    15. George Ferns & Kenneth Amaeshi & Aliette Lambert, 2019. "Drilling their Own Graves: How the European Oil and Gas Supermajors Avoid Sustainability Tensions Through Mythmaking," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 201-231, August.
    16. Shaw, Christopher & Nerlich, Brigitte, 2015. "Metaphor as a mechanism of global climate change governance: A study of international policies, 1992–2012," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 34-40.
    17. Kattirtzi, Michael & Winskel, Mark, 2020. "When experts disagree: Using the Policy Delphi method to analyse divergent expert expectations and preferences on UK energy futures," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    18. Nena Vukelić & Nena Rončević & Sven Toljan, 2022. "Student Teachers’ Willingness to Act in the Climate Change Context," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, January.
    19. Elisabeth Eide & Risto Kunelius, 2021. "Voices of a generation the communicative power of youth activism," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 1-20, November.
    20. Luc Brès & Sébastien Mena & Marie‐Laure Salles‐Djelic, 2019. "Exploring the formal and informal roles of regulatory intermediaries in transnational multistakeholder regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(2), pages 127-140, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Emergent technologies; carbon capture and storage (CCS); climate change; public communications; epistemic community;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M38 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Government Policy and Regulation
    • Q40 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - General
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cam:camdae:1610. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Jake Dyer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.