Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) Technology Public Forums and Application to Governance Frameworks

Program Areas –

Frequently Asked Questions

Below are some FAQ’s about our CDR forums and our process in general. Please see our pTA webpage for more detailed information about our process. If you have additional questions, please reach out to Mahmud at [email protected].

Why public forums on carbon dioxide removal (CDR)?

Current climate projections suggest that drastic measures like removal of atmospheric carbon will be required in addition to traditional mitigation and adaptation measures for achieving the international community’s ambition of staying below a 2°C increase in global temperature. However, the social and policy dimensions of CDR research and potential deployment have not been adequately investigated. There are concerns involving what to research, about how and where to research, and about when and whether to develop. It is unclear at this time who would benefit and who would suffer from the deployment of such technologies, where they might be located, what their effects would be on surrounding populations, and what their impact would be to those already most vulnerable in society. The potential for social disruption and contestation surrounding CDR resource utilization magnifies the importance of exploring the social dimensions of such questions and how they could factor into the development of CDR governance frameworks. The forums will collect informed and inclusive public perspectives on research, development and deployment for responsible and anticipatory governance of CDR technologies in the United States and Canada.

How was this work funded?

The project was funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation and Arizona State University.

How did the forum work?

Community members apply online. About 100 individuals are selected to represent the demographic diversity of their region and are sent educational materials on the topic to prepare for discussion. On the day of the forum, participants sit at tables in small groups with a trained neutral facilitator who guides the participants through multiple rounds of conversation and activities related to carbon dioxide removal. Throughout the day, participants complete worksheets individually and as a group. Survey and observational data collected are analyzed to provide input for technology, planning, and policy decision making for carbon dioxide removal.

The forum has three main deliberation sessions with different subtopics. During the second session, the forum will be divided into two groups, one focused on a land-based and the other focused on a marine CDR.

Session 1, Climate Change Remediation: How has climate change affected our world, what are the pros and cons around various technologies that could provide solutions, and what solutions would you recommend be put in place for your community?
Session 2, Governance of CDR Technologies: Who would you trust to implement and oversee carbon dioxide removal methods? How should the technology be researched and where should the facilities be located? Who should be involved in decision making processes around carbon dioxide removal technologies?
Session 3, Group Share-out: Groups that discussed different case studies come together to share their plans and discuss how their technologies could work together or some challenges that may occur in implementing multiple methods.

How were the forum materials developed?

Our participatory technology assessment (pTA) process is a multi-step process developed to integrate new voices into science policy discussions. Designed as a reflexive, adaptable, and scalable model, the pTA method consists of three participatory phases: 1) Problem Framing; 2) Public Deliberations; and 3) Results and Integration. For this project, this included:

Reviewing literature to establish a shared baseline view of the CDR landscape. The review emphasized a manual search and relevance-sorting of CDR social science and governance literature, yielding insight into existing expert discourse on these topics and gaps in the literature in need of future work.
Interviewing expert stakeholders to map diverse perspectives in the CDR space and to gain a more comprehensive view of stakeholders’ CDR framings, information needs, and desires for engagement.
Hosting two open framing dialogues in late spring of 2023; one online with members of the public from the Gulf Coast, and one in person in Boston, MA for a total of 30 participants. Our findings from these dialogues revealed how public participants frame environmental concerns and CDR’s potential role as a solution to those concerns.
Engaging carbon dioxide removal experts and stakeholders in a workshop in October 2023 in Washington, DC to solicit guidance on the design and the governance issues associated with CDR to better understand how to frame the focus of the citizen forum deliberations.
Developing a full-day forum discussion which included a comprehensive background information packet, introductory videos, and three deliberative discussion sessions
Partnering with local institutions and implementing the forum in two locations: Boston, MA and Vancouver, BC engaging a total of 110 members of the public in deliberation.
Re-engaging stakeholders and experts in preliminary results discussions to inform the final report document during a series of online workshops in October 2025 during which participants share reflections and feedback on preliminary forum results.
Reporting final results in both a comprehensive report and a summary overview that will be shared and posted publicly in 2026.

To learn more about the project activities that led up to the deliberative forums, please explore the following documents:

Problem Framing Report. Developed to summarize the information collected in the literature review, expert stakeholder interviews, and open framing dialogues. This was shared as a briefing document to expert stakeholder design workshop participants.
Expert Stakeholder Design Workshop Agenda. The 2-day workshop held in DC to engage various carbon dioxide removal and governance stakeholders in discussion around the design of the public forum.
Expert Stakeholder Design Workshop Report. The findings from the design workshop that informed the major topics, questions, and design of the public forum.

How were participants recruited and selected to participate?

The ASU team partnered with the Museum of Science in Boston, MA and Banyan Consulting in Vancouver, BC who provided local expertise and advice on recruitment and selection of demographics for participants. The pTA process was developed for participants who are not often heard and do not have a seat at the table for the topic. This means we try to have a broad range of ideals, perspectives, and demographics attend the forum event. To do this, we have interested potential participants complete an application that asks for various demographics and ideals around the topic. We then work with our local partners to select participants based upon our criteria and best practices to ensure groups that are diverse in ideals, opinions, and experiences. Participants receive a stipend, typically in the form of a Visa Gift Card, for their participation.

What information did participants receive about the topic?

Before each forum, participants received a background document they were asked to review before the event. The document included sections on what to expect at the forum, a basic overview of climate change and various climate change solutions such as various carbon dioxide removal methods. It also included all of the printed materials used in the forum so participants could familiarize themselves with the topics before the event. This document was reviewed by a panel of external reviewers with different backgrounds related to climate, carbon dioxide removal, and governance strategies.

During the forum, participants watched a video before each session introducing the topic of that activity. This included a video on climate change and various climate change solutions including carbon dioxide removal methods and a video diving deeper into OAE and DACCS case studies. The videos largely borrowed language from the background document. To take a closer look at the informational material provided to participants, click the link below.

Background Information Packet

What was the role of table facilitators during the forum?

Table facilitators were present at each table to help guide discussion, keep participants on time, remind participants of the ground rules for good discussion, and provide additional instructions for each activity. Facilitators did not answer questions about the content/topic and did not have a background in climate, carbon dioxide removal, or governance.

How were table facilitators trained and recruited?

Table facilitators were recruited via email and word of mouth by project partners at each forum location. Before each forum, facilitators attended an online training hosted by the project team, during which they reviewed all of the forum materials, discussed the role of facilitators, and were briefed on the larger project. Facilitators received a VISA gift card at the end of the forum. At every forum, a member of the project team acted as the lead facilitator, providing instructions to everyone present, answering questions about the activities, and ensuring table facilitators had what they needed to lead their table discussion.

What will happen with the information collected during the forums?

As the team works on analyzing the data collected from the forums, they will meet with experts and stakeholders for input on categories that should receive a deeper analysis. Then, the team will release a full report on all of the forum results. This will include data from each question posed at the forum to paint a complete picture of the participants’ perspectives on climate change solutions and marine and land CDR governance. This report will be shared publicly and posted on the website in 2026.