000			02186nab a2200277 4500
003			OSt
005			20220907160838.0
007			cr aa aaaaa
008			220906b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aNelson, John P _952630
245			_aAssessing solar geoengineering research funders: _bInsights from two US public deliberations/
260			_bsage _c2021
300			_aVol 8, Issue 1, 2021 : (37-55 p.).
520			_aSolar radiation management (SRM), a class of geoengineering methods aiming to alter the earth’s radiative energy balance, carries uncertain and potentially extensive social, ethical, and environmental consequences. For both normative and pragmatic reasons, actors interested in SRM research and implementation would do well to attend to public preferences and concerns regarding SRM work. But despite growing literature treating public perspectives on SRM governance, little is known about public perceptions or preferences regarding potential SRM research funders. Specific research funders could significantly affect both the varieties, scales, and aims of research performed and public responses to SRM research. Drawing from two deliberative public forums on SRM research involving 171 participants in total, this paper begins to fill this gap in the literature. Results reveal diverse and nuanced modes of participant reasoning regarding potential research funders. Among other criteria, participants evaluated funders according to perceived funding capabilities, motivations, and research competencies. Our results significantly expand knowledge on public views, preferences, and modes of reasoning regarding SRM research actors and funders.
650			_a deliberative public engagement, _952631
650			_ageoengineering, _952632
650			_apublic perception, _952633
650			_a public preferences, _952634
650			_a research funding, _952635
650			_asolar radiation management _952636
700			_aKaplan, Leah _952638
700			_a Tomblin, David _952639
773	0		_010524 _915375 _dSage Pub. 2019 - _tAnthropocene review/ _x2053-020X
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1177/2053019620964845
942			_2ddc _cART
999			_c12918 _d12918