Public responses to CO2 storage sites: Lessons from five European cases

Studies of the factors involved in public perceptions of CO2 storage projects reveal a level of complexity and diversity that arguably confounds a comprehensive theoretical account. To some extent, a conceptual approach that simply organises the relevant social scientific knowledge thematically, rather than seeking an integrated explanation, is as useful as any single account that fails to do justice to the contingencies involved. This paper reviews and assembles such knowledge in terms of six themes and applies these themes to five European cases of carbon capture and storage (CCS) implementation. We identify the main factors involved in community responses to CCS as relating to: the characteristics of the project; the engagement process; risk perceptions; the actions of the stakeholders; the characteristics of the community, and the socio-political context

Am I My Peer's Keeper? Social Responsibility in Financial Decision Making

Decision makers often take risky decisions on the behalf of others rather than for themselves. Competing theoretical models predict both, higher as well as lower levels of risk aversion when taking risk for others, and the experimental evidence is mixed. In our within-subject design, money managers have substantial responsibility by taking investment decisions for themselves and for a group of six clients, when payments are either fixed or perfectly aligned. We find that money managers invest significantly less for others than for themselves (cautious shift) which is mainly driven by a less risk averse sub sample. Digging deeper we find money managers to rather act in line with what they believe the clients would invest for themselves. We derive a responsibility weighting function to show that with a perfectly aligned payment the money manager weights egoistic and social preferences. Finally we bring our results in perspective with the mixed experimental literature.Ein großer Teil risikoreicher, ökonomischer Entscheidungen wird von Dritten anstelle der Betroffenen getroffen. In solchen Fällen sagt die eine Klasse theoretischer Modelle geringere Risikoaversion voraus, eine andere Klasse aber höhere Risikoaversion im Vergleich zur Situation, bei der der Betroffene selbst die Entscheidung trifft. Die bisherigen empirischen Ergebnisse aus Laborexperimenten sind ebenso gemischt oder finden keine Unterschiede zwischen der Entscheidung für sich selbst oder für andere Personen. Wir verwenden ein 'within-subjects' für unser Experiment, bei dem Vermögensverwalter in unterschiedlichen Stufen für sich selbst, für eine Gruppe von Klienten, oder für sich selbst und eine Gruppe von Klienten Investitionsentscheidungen treffen. Wir erhöhen dabei die Soziale Verantwortung über die Größe der Gruppe von Investoren, um Verantwortungseffekte zu verstärken. Unsere Ergebnisse zeigen, dass das Risiko bei der Investition für andere signifikant geringer ist als bei der Investition für sich selbst. Dieses Aggregat-Ergebnis ist allerdings nur durch eine unterdurchschnittlich risikoaverse Subpopulation unserer Stichprobe getrieben. Eine genauere Analyse der Investitionsmotive zeigt, dass die Vermögensverwalter gemäß ihrer Erwartung der Klienten-Präferenzen handeln. Wir passen eine Nutzenfunktion mit Verantwortungs-Gewichten an und finden, dass die beobachtete Riskioaversion bei gemeinschaftlichen Investitionen durch egoistische und soziale Präferenzen erklärt werden kann. Abschließend stellen wir unsere Ergebnisse in den Kontext der bisherigen Literatur und versuchen die gemischten, bisherigen Ergebnisse aufgrund unserer Erkenntnisse zu erklären

Toward a polycentric low-carbon transition: the roles of community-based energy initiatives in enhancing the resilience of energy systems

An understanding of the resilience of energy systems is critical in order to tackle forthcoming challenges. This chapter proposes that the polycentric governance perspective, developed by Vincent and Elinor Ostrom, may be highly relevant in formulating policies to enhance the resilience of future energy systems. Polycentric governance systems involve the coexistence of many self-organized centers of decision making at multiple levels that are formally independent of each other, but operate under an overarching set of rules. Given this polycentric approach, this chapter studies the roles of community-based energy initiatives and, in particular, of renewable energy cooperatives, in enhancing the institutional resilience of energy systems. In this perspective, the chapter identifies three major socio-institutional obstacles, which undermine this resilience capacity: the collective action problem arising from the diffusion of sustainable energy technologies and practices, the lack of public trust in established energy actors and the existence of strong vested interests in favor of the status quo. Then, it shows why the development of community-based energy initiatives and renewable energy cooperatives may offer effective responses to these obstacles, relying on many empirical illustrations. More specifically, it is argued that community-based energy initiatives present institutional features encouraging the activation of social norms and a high trust capital, therefore enabling them to offer effective solutions to avoid free riding and enhance trust in energy institutions and organizations. The creation of federated polycentric structures may also offer a partial response to the existence of vested interests in favor of the status quo. Finally, some recommendations for policymakers are derived from this analysis

Psychology and environmental problems (Could Canadian psychologists help save the planet?)

Peer reviewed: NoNRC publication: Ye