Beyond techno-economic assessments: A comparative political economy framework for assessing national carbon dioxide removal (CDR) deployment

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) has become a contested yet critical component of net-zero strategies despite its deployment consistently lagging corporate and government ambitions. This article develops and applies a comparative political economy framework to assess national CDR deployment. The framework is organised around four analytical categories – material conditions, policy settings, actor configurations, deployment realities – and is operationalised through six national case studies selected for their diversity in geography, fossil fuel dependence, and governance systems: Brazil, Italy, Malaysia, Norway, Saudi Arabia, and the United Kingdom. Drawing on policy document analysis and project deployment data, the analysis reveals four key patterns. First, technical estimates routinely overestimate the available geological CO 2 storage capacity by ignoring social and ecological constraints that would reduce storage potential by 843 GtCO 2 (−85%) across the six countries. Second, the absence of separated emissions reduction and removal targets increases the risk of mitigation deterrence if hypothetical future removals are allowed to substitute for near-term emission cuts. Third, fossil fuel and financial incumbent actors control geological storage and shape regulatory decisions in emerging CDR governance that channels public funds and political attention to CCS. Fourth, operational CDR capacity (0.22-0.34 MtCO 2 /yr) across all six countries is dwarfed by operational CCS capacity (16.1 MtCO 2 /yr) with proposed CCS (371.4-415.4 MtCO 2 /yr) far exceeding proposed CDR deployment (28.9-29.4 MtCO 2 /yr) – though more complete inventories are available for industrial CCS than land-based removals, and planned capacities are not forecasts. Overall, the framework offers a diagnostic toolkit for researchers and policymakers to move beyond techno-economic assessments by revealing structural barriers to just and equitable carbon removal.