https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/18/6/2689
‎
‎*Authors; *Pengyao Gao, Amanda Sie, Lili Xia and Chaochao Gao

*10 March 2026*

*Abstract*
Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) is increasingly discussed as a potential
supplement to climate-change mitigation, yet public and stakeholder
judgments remain sensitive to knowledge, framing, and perceived risks. We
examined how a structured university classroom module on SRM reshaped
student perceptions using a matched pre–post survey design. Participants
were students enrolled in an English-taught global climate change course (N
= 106); 103 students provided valid matched responses after applying
pre-specified exclusion rules. Self-rated SRM knowledge increased
substantially after the module (mean change +0.47 on a 1–3 scale; Wilcoxon
signed-rank p (Holm-adjusted) < 1 × 10−7; Cohen’s dz = 0.67). Support for
SRM research remained moderately positive but did not increase (pre mean
3.76 to post mean 3.54 on a 1–5 scale). In contrast, support for
stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) deployment declined (pre mean 3.42 to
post mean 2.95; p (Holm-adjusted) = 0.0084; dz = −0.33), and preferences
shifted away from prioritizing climate intervention toward low-carbon
development (mean change −0.68 on a 1–5 priority scale; p (Holm-adjusted) =
0.0001; dz = −0.45). Post-lecture models indicated that perceived benefits
versus risks was the most consistent correlate of support across outcomes.
Open-ended responses most frequently emphasized feasibility, unintended
consequences, governance, and moral hazard. Overall, students largely
endorsed SRM research as valuable while becoming more cautious about
deployment and political prioritization, suggesting that balanced,
structured instruction can sharpen sensitivity to evidence, uncertainty,
and potential trade-offs that students also weighed in the survey.

*Source: MDPI*

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAHJsh99Oj6RqZQ3nn3FjbbqkGTbki%3Dddwj_17Q%2BNaD3S-VaDvg%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to