Solar radiation management (SRM), a class of geoengineering methods aiming to alter the earth’s radiative energy balance, carries uncertain and potentially extensive social, ethical, and environmental consequences. For both normative and pragmatic reasons, actors interested in SRM research and implementation would do well to attend to public preferences and concerns regarding SRM work. But despite growing literature treating public perspectives on SRM governance, little is known about public perceptions or preferences regarding potential SRM research funders. Specific research funders could significantly affect both the varieties, scales, and aims of research performed and public responses to SRM research. Drawing from two deliberative public forums on SRM research involving 171 participants in total, this paper begins to fill this gap in the literature. Results reveal diverse and nuanced modes of participant reasoning regarding potential research funders. Among other criteria, participants evaluated funders according to perceived funding capabilities, motivations, and research competencies. Our results significantly expand knowledge on public views, preferences, and modes of reasoning regarding SRM research actors and funders.

太阳辐射管理（SRM）是旨在改变地球辐射能量平衡的一类地球工程方法，它带来不确定的且可能潜在的广泛的社会，道德和环境后果。出于规范和务实的原因，对SRM研究和实施感兴趣的参与者将很好地参与公众对SRM工作的偏好和关注。但是，尽管越来越多的文献探讨了公众对SRM治理的观点，但对于公众对潜在SRM研究资助者的看法或偏好知之甚少。特定的研究资助者可能会极大地影响所进行研究的种类，规模和目的以及公众对SRM研究的反应。从两个有关SRM研究的协商性公共论坛中，共有171名参与者参加，本文开始填补文献中的空白。结果揭示了与潜在研究资助者有关的参与者推理的多种细微差别模式。在其他标准中，参与者根据感知的资金能力，动机和研究能力对资助者进行了评估。我们的结果极大地扩展了有关SRM研究参与者和资助者的公众观点，偏好和推理模式的知识。