Introduction
The majority of scientists and society members agree that climate change is a wicked problem that has been exacerbated by human activity and needs to be addressed immediately. Despite that agreement, there are differing opinions on the strategies that need to be followed to address climate change, and who holds the responsibility for instigating and applying those strategies (Kenis & Mathijs, 2012). The main contestation is whether climate change can be addressed through changing personal behaviours; the use of green technology-ecomodernism; political and social changes, or some combination of the above.
Change on human behaviours, is one of the strategies suggested to address climate change. For the behavioural changes to be effective in addressing climate change, the focus should be on “high impact behaviours and high emitting groups” (Whitmarsh et al., 2021) p.79, rather than small scale behavioural changes. Examples of behavioural changes include but not limited to our dietary preferences (Li et al., 2024; Tilman & Clark, 2015), and transportation choices (Gössling & Dolnicar, 2023; Moriarty & Honnery, 2021).
Ecomodernism is a contextual analytical perspective. It promotes technological innovation and economic development as means to address climate change while decoupling human prosperity from environmental degradation (Javed et al., 2025). Unlike ecological modernisation theory, which emphasises managing socio-ecological systems, ecomodernism stresses liberating nature through technological substitution and intensification, explaining its support for renewables, nuclear power, and carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS).
Social acceptance of technological advancements is an important element that can influence the implementation of technology-based solutions to address climate change towards a Net Zero future (Tanveer et al., 2021; Upham et al., 2015). In this paper we focus on the community aspect of social acceptance, rather than that of market or political acceptance (Wüstenhagen et al., 2007). Meaningful public participation in climate change projects, can lead in positive results by strengthening adaptation initiatives and promoting mitigation ambitions (Cattino & Reckien, 2021). In addition, several scholars have pinpointed the importance of engaging with local communities from very early on, and even before a decarbonisation project has started (Beddies, 2015; Mabon et al., 2015), which was not the case for our project. In their paper Armstrong et al. (2025), discuss how public participation in scientific research can have multiple benefits to the local communities by bolstering community, political and economic empowerment.
We believe that local communities, should have at least the same access to resources as companies have, to be able to address wicked issues such as climate change and the reduction of CO2 from the atmosphere. Through our research, we want to learn from local communities about the work they do to address climate change, while also being able to contribute to their efforts by sharing resources and information they might not have access to. We hope we can act as a pedestal to bring their voices forward and disrupt the current socio-technological paradigm that sees local communities as a hurdle to a Net Zero future, rather than embrace their knowledge and capacities to support a Net Zero future.
Methodology
The study area of this paper is a small island in Greece that is active in both the tourism and agriculture industry throughout the year. In addition, it has an operational oil field that has recently been licensed for carbon dioxide storage. Despite community members’ knowledge and experiences with the oil field, they had very little knowledge of carbon storage and the area’s potential.
The data used in this paper are based on a one-hour semi-structured interview conducted with one of the project’s participants. This interview represents the culmination of a three-year engagement with community members within the framework of the ConsenCUS project. Over this period, the research team held five structured meetings and discussions with local stakeholders, including one face-to-face meeting and four online meetings. The in-person meeting comprised a presentation of the ConsenCUS project by the researchers, followed by a general informational session on Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (CCUS) technologies, which stimulated extensive discussion and questioning from both community members and researchers. A detailed account of the study area and the broader collaborative process is provided in Stavrianakis et al. (2024). The interviewee was selected purposively due to his sustained and active participation throughout all stages of the engagement process and his prominent role in local community affairs. In addition to his community involvement, he has substantial professional experience as a manager in various industrial contexts and has led multiple international projects. This combination of local embeddedness, industrial expertise, and experience in transnational project governance positions him as a boundary actor operating at the interface between community, industry, and governance. As such, his perspective offers analytically rich insights into how CCUS technologies are understood, negotiated, and evaluated across these intersecting domains. The unit of analysis in this study is the articulated perspective of this boundary actor, understood not as an isolated individual opinion but as a situated account shaped by prolonged interaction with both local residents and project stakeholders over time. This approach allows for an in-depth exploration of meaning-making processes and socio-technical interpretations within the specific community context under study.
The participant provided informed consent to audio-record the interview and to use the data for research purposes. Both verbal and written consent options were offered, and the participant elected to provide verbal informed consent.
The focus of the interview was to get an account of the perceived societal impact our project had as understood by a community member. The interview was recorded through Teams and transcribed in the Greek language as that was the language used throughout the interview.
An abductive thematic analysis was used, informed by questions asked in the interview and themes emerging from the text (Thompson, 2022). The analysis was done in the Greek language, and relevant excerpts were then translated in the English language.
The final draft was shared with the interviewee for member checking and giving the interviewee the opportunity to remove or add anything they see fit (Pinto et al., 2022; Varpio et al., 2017).
This study has received ethical approval from the Research and Ethics Committee at Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen Business School (approval code: 10052022PS/EL/ZM, approval date: 10 May 2022.
Results
There are three main themes we identified from the interview as being crucial to the societal impacts of this project. Below we discuss each theme individually using direct quotes from the interview.
Social capital and community awareness
Local communities demonstrate both the capacity and the willingness to actively engage with large-scale technological and environmental projects; however, their participation is often constrained by limited access to information, expertise, and institutional support. This finding aligns with existing literature on social capital, which emphasises that meaningful participation depends not only on willingness but also on access to knowledge and resources. The interviewee highlighted the pivotal role that the project’s initial communication played for him and, by extension, for the wider local community. Prior to this engagement, both he and most local residents possessed only a very general understanding of carbon storage technologies.
• “Basically, for me, our acquaintance played a pivotal role, because although I have been in business for many years and I knew about the European Trade Scheme, and I knew we had to reduce the CO 2 from the atmosphere, that’s all I knew. I then started reading more about the carbon stock exchange and how political decisions, [talking about Donal Trump] can influence different trading schemes”.
This quote illustrates how early engagement can act as a catalyst for knowledge-building and awareness, reinforcing arguments in the literature that trust and understanding are gradually constructed through iterative interaction rather than one-off information campaigns. The discussion subsequently shifted to the role of the European Union in fostering social capital at the local level. The interviewee contrasted the substantial funding available to private companies for research and development with the limited support available to communities that are directly affected by such projects.
He argued that local communities would benefit from access to an independent, EU-supported advisory body composed of social scientists, geologists, and other experts who could provide impartial guidance and oversight.
• “If we have a project, let’s put it in simple terms, that is funded by the EU, let’s say a consortium that includes BP, and then we have another team part of the same project keeping an eye on them … you can’t do that because you then have a vertical approach, where you should have a horizontal approach, i.e. a matrix organisation that is an independent entity and they can advise on different projects”.
This perspective resonates with scholarship advocating for horizontal, participatory governance structures as a means of strengthening social capital and reducing power asymmetries between communities, industry, and regulators. It also directly informs the paper’s recommendations for more inclusive and independent support mechanisms for affected communities.
Governance
Governance emerged as a central theme shaping both participation and trust. The interviewee stressed that political decision-making processes, regulatory standards, and monitoring capacity significantly influence public confidence in CCUS initiatives. Drawing comparisons with other countries, such as Norway, he noted that CO2 storage there is permitted at considerable distances from the shore, whereas the proposed site near his community is located only a few miles from inhabited areas. Although formal assurances regarding safety exist, he expressed deep scepticism about the capacity of the Greek state to effectively monitor such operations.
• “Look here, my personal view is that it is very difficult to trust them [Greek government]. The state is pushed by the companies, for example to follow the London Protocol 4. And what does the London Protocol say? It says that for the marine transportation of CO2 certain specifications and standards should be followed … . Now, because 2/3 of the member states did not vote for it, the London Protocol has no validity, and you need to have agreements between two parties. The company is pressuring the society to pass laws “in the night” and “under the table” and the government does not know what to do. The prime minister does not know what to do and there is continuity in the public services and being independent from the government”.
His concerns echo findings in the governance literature highlighting how perceived regulatory capture and opaque decision-making undermine institutional trust. Notably, the interviewee also expressed scepticism towards scientific claims that guarantee long-term containment over centuries, reflecting broader debates about uncertainty, expertise, and risk communication in CCUS projects.
The participant further described his intermediary role within local governance structures. Representatives from different political parties within the island’s local government frequently sought his advice on carbon storage and requested informational materials such as reports and presentations. While he willingly provided technical information, he deliberately avoided aligning with any political faction, viewing neutrality as essential to maintaining credibility.
He characterised himself as an “information centre” for the community, underscoring his role as a boundary actor mediating between science, politics, and local society. The importance of political alignment across governance scales was also emphasised, particularly the contrast between the island’s mayor—who opposed CO2 storage—and the national government, which supports it.
• “Yes, it is a big political game, and I am in the middle. They argue with each other, and I have told them, that if we want to go forward, then we need to establish a committee on the island”.
Place based concerns
Place-based concerns strongly shaped the interviewee’s risk perceptions and attitudes towards CO2 storage. Prior to engagement with the project, his understanding of carbon dioxide was largely generic. However, following initial discussions, he actively sought further information, particularly on geological storage, which he identified as his primary concern. This aligns with literature on place attachment and “not-in-my-backyard” (NIMBY) dynamics, where proximity intensifies perceived risk. His foremost concern related to human health, followed by potential impacts on the natural environment and marine ecosystems.
• “When you have a house that is 3 kilometres away from the storage site, and because I have that house and I am looking at my personal interest, and that is a problem for me. Now if you take that to other places, like Norway or somewhere 150 kilometres away, my problem would be smaller. I know that you might destroy somehow the marine environment, I do not know the exact disasters that can take place if suddenly the concentration of CO2 increases by 30–20 percent … you will have and ecological disaster, but human lives are not threatened as much”.
This quote illustrates how spatial proximity shapes risk acceptability, reinforcing arguments that place-based concerns cannot be addressed solely through technical assurances. The interviewee further acknowledged potential ecological consequences, even if human lives were perceived to be less directly threatened at greater distances. To contextualise his fears, he referred to the 1986 Lake Nyos disaster in Cameroon, where a sudden release of CO2 caused widespread fatalities. Although he recognised that the event was triggered by natural volcanic activity, he emphasised that carbon dioxide remains hazardous regardless of whether its source is natural or anthropogenic. This example highlights how historical disasters inform contemporary risk imaginaries and underscores the need for policy recommendations that explicitly address local place-based anxieties rather than treating them as irrational or uninformed.
Implications
From the above we can see that the participant was eager to get involved with the project, as he saw both personal and communities benefit in his involvement. Despite his initial lack of knowledge on the topic, he succeeded on his own time to develop an overall understanding of carbon storage and share his knowledge with others in the community.
Although we have only provided a snippet of our research in this paper, we are confident that our findings can inform future projects seeking to address issues related to climate change and environmental concerns.
Our recommendations for future community engagement to further bolster the social impacts of a project include
1) Early involvement of the public in the project.
2) Promote public participation in scientific research.
3) Spherical understanding of the socio-political situation of the region prior to engaging with the communities.
4) Develop easy to access resources that communities can refer to when needed to enhance their capacity in decision making and further involvement in the project.
Ethics and consent statement
This study received ethical approval from the Research and Ethics Committee at Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen Business School (approval code: 10052022PS/EL/ZM, approval date: 10 May 2022). The participant provided verbal informed consent to be audio-recorded and for the data to be used for research purposes. Both verbal and written consent options were offered, and the participant chose to give consent verbally.
Data availability statement
Due to the small locality of the study area, the availability of the qualitative dataset could expose the identity of the participant. For access to the non-public dataset, you can email the corresponding author at k.stavrianakis@rgu.ac.uk with a request to access the qualitative transcript.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the participants for giving us their valuable time and sharing their knowledge and experiences with us.
References
- Armstrong AK, Shinbrot X, Hauptfeld RS:
Exploring the potential for empowerment outcomes through Public Participation in Scientific Research.
Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education.
2025; Publisher Full Text
- Beddies L:
Towards a better understanding of public resistance: carbon capture and storage and the power of the independent-minded citizen.
MaRBLe.
2015; 5: 5. Publisher Full Text
- Cattino M, Reckien D:
Does public participation lead to more ambitious and transformative local climate change planning?
Curr Opin Environ Sustain.
2021; 52: 100–110. Publisher Full Text
- Gössling S, Dolnicar S:
A review of air travel behavior and climate change.
Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Change.
2023; 14(1): e802. Publisher Full Text
- Javed MH, Ahmad A, Nizami AS, et al.:
Sustainable development at the crossroads: navigating eco-humanism and eco-modernism.
Curr Opin Green Sustain Chem.
2025; 53: 101018. Publisher Full Text
- Kenis A, Mathijs E:
Beyond individual behaviour change: the role of power, knowledge and strategy in tackling climate change.
Environ Educ Res.
2012; 18(1): 45–65. Publisher Full Text
- Li Y, He P, Shan Y, et al.:
Reducing climate change impacts from the global food system through diet shifts.
Nat Clim Chang.
2024; 14(9): 943–953. Publisher Full Text
- Mabon L, Shackley S, Blackford JC, et al.:
Local perceptions of the QICS experimental offshore CO2 release: results from social science research.
International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control.
2015; 38: 18–25. Publisher Full Text
- Moriarty P, Honnery D:
Reducing personal mobility for climate change mitigation.
In:
Handbook of climate change mitigation and adaptation.
Springer;
2021; 1–37. Publisher Full Text
- Pinto A, Rodriguez A, Smith J:
Researching sensitive topics in healthcare.
Evid Based Nurs.
2022; 25(2): 41–43. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- Stavrianakis K, Nielsen J, Morrison Z:
Public perception and acceptance of CCUS: preliminary findings of a qualitative case study in Greece [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved].
Open Res Eur.
2024; 3: 205. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- Tanveer A, Zeng S, Irfan M, et al.:
Do perceived risk, perception of self-efficacy, and openness to technology matter for solar PV adoption? An application of the extended theory of planned behavior.
Energies.
2021; 14(16): 5008. Publisher Full Text
- Thompson J:
A guide to abductive thematic analysis.
The Qualitative Report.
2022; 27(5) Publisher Full Text
- Tilman D, Clark M:
Food, agriculture & the environment: can we feed the world & save the earth?
Daedalus.
2015; 144(4): 8–23. Publisher Full Text
- Upham P, Oltra C, Boso À:
Towards a cross-paradigmatic framework of the social acceptance of energy systems.
Energy Res Soc Sci.
2015; 8: 100–112. Publisher Full Text
- Varpio L, Ajjawi R, Monrouxe LV, et al.:
Shedding the cobra effect: problematising thematic emergence, triangulation, saturation and member checking.
Med Educ.
2017; 51(1): 40–50. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- Whitmarsh L, Poortinga W, Capstick S:
Behaviour change to address climate change.
Curr Opin Psychol.
2021; 42: 76–81. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- Wüstenhagen R, Wolsink M, Bürer MJ:
Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: an introduction to the concept.
Energy Policy.
2007; 35(5): 2683–2691. Publisher Full Text
