👉Full article: iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1...

❕ our analysis only considers third-party funding as registered in the Dimensions database; other funding sources, nationally varying science policies and funding cultures as well as developments in funding cultures over the past decades deserve greater attention in future work.

🏭 cross-sectoral research collaborations involving companies are more common for carbon capture and storage #CCS research, where major players from the oil and gas industry appear as central and well-connected actors in the network.

🤝 private sector involvement in knowledge production activities is comparatively low, with most cross-sectoral research collaboration focusing on #DACCS and #BECCS.

🔬 research funding for carbon removal is mostly directed towards natural, engineering and agricultural science, with little but increasing support for social science. Greater inclusion of social science perspectives is warranted to ensure social and political considerations are accounted for.

🌏 research funding for carbon removal remains highly concentrated in North America, followed by European countries and China. These unequal funding patterns reflect geographic disparities in funding of climate and clean technology research more broadly.

📈 research funding for carbon removal has increased substantially over the last years, much more than general funding for climate science and technologies, signaling the emergence of CDR as a central element in research on climate change mitigation.

We used comprehensive search queries and machine learning to identify more than 6000 research grants on twelve CDR options registered in the #Dimensions database.

Hi Catherine, could you add me to the CDR starter pack?