Dealing with the uncertainties of climate engineering: Warnings from a psychological complex problem solving perspective

Abstract

a b s t r a c tDecision-makers in the context of climate politics are confronted with considerable uncertainties due to the complexities inherent in the relevant natural and social systems. Nonetheless, pressure on decision-makers to find solutions to dangerous climate change is rising due to the inertia in the climate system. Considering these pressures, technological options (climate engineering) have been proposed to counteract the effects of climatic change. However, introducing options that bear their own scientific uncertainties means further adding to the complexity of the situation. By adopting the psychological perspective of complex problem solving research, we analyze one frequently neglected source of uncertainty with regard to climate engineering: errors of the political problemsolver in his interaction with the situational demands of complex problems. More specifically, we examine the psychological sources for human error that are common in dealing with the uncertainties implied in this type of problem. We will conclude from the complex problem solving perspective that a consideration of climate engineering in the context of climate change can provide a dangerous illusion of controllability.

Addressing Complexity in Environmental Management and Governance

“…First, researchers continuously observe that sustainability problems are complex or "wicked". Examples refer to various environmental fields such as the management of fresh waters [1][2][3], climate change [4,5], or food and agriculture [6][7][8], among others. Second, researchers suggest closely related political models to address complex or "wicked" problems.…”

Cognitive pitfalls in dealing with sustainability

“…In an excellent paper on the uncertainties of climate engineering, Amelung and Funke (2013) illustrate how the decision on injecting aerosols in the stratosphere to reduce solar radiation and thus counter extreme weather events, can be described using criteria of the complex problem solving research paradigm: (e) Polytely. The manifold and various effects of climate engineering would benefit all involved stakeholders differently.…”

Dual high‐stake emerging technologies: a review of the climate engineering research literature

“…Of these 48% of abstracts, one eighth of them referred to some kind of catastrophic effects. Most of them referred to natural disasters, but a few identified other potential perils, for example, ‘that a consideration of climate engineering in the context of climate change can provide a dangerous illusion of controllability’ …”

“…Most of them referred to natural disasters, but a few identified other potential perils, for example, 'that a consideration of climate engineering in the context of climate change can provide a dangerous illusion of controllability'. 49 What, then, is said to be at stake in abstracts? We distinguished whether abstracts referred to: (a) general concern over the consequences of climate engineering, (b) high stakes, and (c) general debates or other scholars addressing stakes.…”