Procedural Justice in Carbon Capture and Storage

This paper examines where and how claims of procedural injustice, or demands for procedural justice, might arise with respect to carbon capture and storage (CCS), taking a broad view of the CCS research, development and deployment process. It considers the principles that might govern such claims and seeks to identify where responsibility might lie for ensuring justice, or addressing contested claims of injustice. It is suggested that claims of procedural injustice arising from CCS are most likely to arise during implementation, from locally affected populations, raising concerns of inadequate information or consultation; but they may also arise from representatives of other indirectly affected groups, such as those affected by upstream impacts of coal mining, or energy market consequences of CCS policy. It is further suggested that claims are most likely to be directed at public authorities in respect of decisions over policy, strategy or authorisations for individual developments, but there are also routes by which claims may be directed at the corporations involved, especially under human rights provisions. The paper suggests a need for careful consideration of both procedural and, by implication, distributive justice matters in the emerging regulatory and support framework for CCS, with a particular imperative for moving public engagement upstream prior to deployment and indeed even to research programmes, to maximise the scope for legitimate influence on future outcomes.

[1]  Anders Hansson COLONIZING THE FUTURE: The case of CCS , 2012 .

[2]  J. Clinch Third Party Rights of Appeal: Enhancing Democracy or Hindering Progress? , 2006 .

[3]  G. Rau,et al.  CO2 mitigation via capture and chemical conversion in seawater. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[4]  Gabriele Abels,et al.  Citizen Involvement in Public Policy-making: Does it Improve Democratic Legitimacy and Accountability? The Case of pTA , 2007 .

[5]  Simon Joss,et al.  Considering the concept of procedural justice for public policy- and decision-making in science and technology , 1999 .

[6]  G. Leventhal What Should Be Done with Equity Theory? New Approaches to the Study of Fairness in Social Relationships. , 1976 .

[7]  Gabrielle Wong-Parodi,et al.  The Role of Social Factors in Shaping Public Perceptions of CCS: Results of Multi-State Focus Group Interviews in the U.S. , 2009 .

[8]  Paul Upham,et al.  Public attitudes, understanding, and engagement in relation to low-carbon energy. A selective review of academic and non-academic literatures : report for RCUK Energy Programme , 2011 .

[9]  G. Leventhal What Should Be Done with Equity Theory , 1980 .

[10]  Simon Shackley,et al.  Towards a Public Communication and Engagement Strategy for Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Projects in Scotland , 2010 .

[11]  A. Fearne,et al.  MEASURING DISTRIBUTIVE AND PROCEDURAL JUSTICE IN BUYER/SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF UK SUPERMARKET SUPPLY CHAINS 1 , 2004 .

[12]  R. Lake,et al.  VOLUNTEERS, NIMBYs, AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE: DILEMMAS OF DEMOCRATIC PRACTICE , 1996 .

[13]  V. Masson‐Delmotte,et al.  Target atmospheric CO2: Where should humanity aim? , 2008, 0804.1126.

[14]  Anders Hansson,et al.  Energy policy on shaky ground? : A study of CCS-scenarios , 2009 .

[15]  A. Wolfe,et al.  A Framework for Analyzing Dialogues over the Acceptability of Controversial Technologies , 2002 .

[16]  Nirmalya Kumar,et al.  The power of trust in manufacturer-retailer relationships , 1996 .

[17]  Paul Upham,et al.  The Public and CCS: The importance of communication and participation in the context of local realities , 2011 .

[18]  A. Sen,et al.  The idea of justice , 2009, Princeton Readings in Political Thought.

[19]  Elizabeth L. Malone,et al.  Moving from misinformation derived from public attitude surveys on carbon dioxide capture and storage towards realistic stakeholder involvement , 2010 .