Abstract Greenhouse gas removal (GGR) is increasingly seen as a key dimension of national and international climate policy. The need to deploy a portfolio of GGR technologies in order to decarbonise sectors with the ‘hardest-to-abate’ emissions, particularly to achieve net-zero emissions targets, has become increasingly evident in recent years. In May 2019, the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) published a report outlining a pathway to net-zero emissions in the UK, which comprised significant contributions from engineered and land-based removals. The target of net-zero emissions has since been enshrined in UK legislation, meaning that GGR will likely be part of the UK’s climate strategy. Plans for GGR deployment will therefore need to be set in motion in the short-term, in order to align with the timeframe proposed by the CCC. Despite a growing body of research examining the role governance could and should play in GGR development and deployment, there is a gap in the literature relating to the social implications of removal activities. In particular, the roles of procedural justice (PJ) and social legitimacy (SL) have not been closely examined. This study comprises an analysis of relevant legislation, combined with a series of interviews conducted in the community of Selby (a proposed location for BECCS development) in order to investigate PJ and SL in the context of GGR. It is found that the existing legal framework operates PJ as a ‘tick-the-box’ exercise, failing to engage a wide range of interested stakeholders or to promote meaningful engagements. Moreover, the PJ landscape for GGR is unplanned and adapted from existing legislation and cannot meet the unique needs of this novel activity, such as the need to engage the wider national public given their interest in climate change mitigation. Research in Selby corroborates these findings, revealing a range of issues with engagement procedures, including disinterest or disillusionment with processes, a lack of accessible information, and a disparity between stakeholder expectations and GGR realities. Ultimately, it is only by conducting meaningful engagements, which adequately inform and include participants, that the role of social legitimacy can truly be understood and thus leveraged.

中文翻译：

---

英国净零目标：深入了解温室气体清除的程序正义

摘要 温室气体去除 (GGR) 越来越被视为国家和国际气候政策的一个关键维度。部署一系列 GGR 技术以使排放“最难减少”的部门脱碳，特别是实现净零排放目标的需求近年来变得越来越明显。2019 年 5 月，气候变化委员会 (CCC) 发布了一份报告，概述了英国实现净零排放的途径，其中包括工程和陆基清除的重大贡献。此后，净零排放目标已载入英国立法，这意味着 GGR 很可能成为英国气候战略的一部分。因此，需要在短期内启动 GGR 部署计划，以便与 CCC 提出的时间表保持一致。尽管研究治理在 GGR 开发和部署中可以而且应该发挥的作用的研究越来越多，但与清除活动的社会影响相关的文献中存在空白。特别是，程序正义 (PJ) 和社会合法性 (SL) 的作用尚未得到仔细研究。本研究包括对相关立法的分析，并结合在塞尔比社区（BECCS 开发的拟议地点）进行的一系列访谈，以在 GGR 的背景下调查 PJ 和 SL。发现现有的法律框架将 PJ 运作为一种“勾选框”练习，未能吸引广泛的利益相关者或促进有意义的参与。而且，GGR 的 PJ 景观是计划外的，并且根据现有立法进行了调整，无法满足这项新活动的独特需求，例如鉴于他们对减缓气候变化的兴趣，需要吸引更广泛的国家公众。塞尔比的研究证实了这些发现，揭示了参与程序的一系列问题，包括对流程不感兴趣或幻灭、缺乏可访问的信息以及利益相关者期望与 GGR 现实之间的差异。归根结底，只有通过有意义的参与，充分告知并包括参与者，才能真正理解并利用社会合法性的作用。塞尔比的研究证实了这些发现，揭示了参与程序的一系列问题，包括对流程不感兴趣或幻灭、缺乏可访问的信息以及利益相关者期望与 GGR 现实之间的差异。归根结底，只有通过有意义的参与，充分告知并包括参与者，才能真正理解并利用社会合法性的作用。塞尔比的研究证实了这些发现，揭示了参与程序的一系列问题，包括对流程不感兴趣或幻灭、缺乏可访问的信息以及利益相关者期望与 GGR 现实之间的差异。归根结底，只有通过有意义的参与，充分告知并包括参与者，才能真正理解并利用社会合法性的作用。