Solar Geoengineering: Social Science, Legal, Ethical, and Economic Frameworks

Flegal, Jane A.; Hubert, Anna‐Maria; Morrow, David R.; Moreno‐Cruz, Juan

doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-102017-030032

Cited by 31 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 135 publications

(125 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the following year, Preston's (2013a) review also had 97 sources, separating out the ethical issues according to the temporal spaces in which they appear. The two subsequent reviews by Lenzi (2018) and Flegal et al (2019) were specialist reviews focusing exclusively on the two subsets of geoengineering, namely, negative emission and SRM respectively. Lenzi (2018) had 75 sources and Flegal et al (2019), 177.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The two subsequent reviews by Lenzi (2018) and Flegal et al (2019) were specialist reviews focusing exclusively on the two subsets of geoengineering, namely, negative emission and SRM respectively. Lenzi (2018) had 75 sources and Flegal et al (2019), 177. In comparison, this review uses the highest number of sources on the ethics of geoengineering in general, chosen by employing a standard methodology.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The snowballing was exercised in two rounds. Firstly, four papers from among the selections were identified, which are of a review nature focusing on the ethics of geoengineering and its subsets, viz., Betz and Casean (2012), Preston (2013a), Lenzi (2018) and Flegal et al (2019). The bibliography of these four papers was checked through.…”

Section: Methodsologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The bibliography of these four papers was checked through. Accordingly, a number of 125 sources were selected, with 24 from Betz and Casean (2012), 29 from Preston (2013a), 17 from Lenzi (2018) and 55 from Flegal et al (2019). A careful scrutiny of the selections so far revealed that the list was not exhaustive enough across the literature around the ethics of geoengineering.…”

Section: Methodsologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…call it the second wave approach. The review by Flegal et al (2019) shows that a rich categorisation of the social, legal, and ethical constituencies of the debate is possible for a geoengineering scheme like SRM alone. This review seems to disagree with the observation of Wong (2015) that in the existing discussion on the ethics of geoengineering only first order and second order questions are raised, overlooking the problems of post implementation scenarios.…”

Section: Two Generations Of Argumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The Ethics of Geoengineering: A Literature Review

Pamplany¹,

Gordijn

Brereton

2020

Sci Eng Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geoengineering as a technological intervention to avert the dangerous climate change has been on the table at least since 2006. The global outreach of the technology exercised in a non-encapsulated system, the concerns with unprecedented levels and scales of impact and the overarching interdisciplinarity of the project make the geoengineering debate ethically quite relevant and complex. This paper explores the ethical desirability of geoengineering from an overall review of the existing literature on the ethics of geoengineering. It identifies the relevant literature on the ethics of geoengineering by employing a standard methodology. Based on various framing of the major ethical arguments and their subsets, the results section presents the opportunities and challenges at stake in geoengineering from an ethical point of view. The discussion section takes a keen interest in identifying the evolving dynamics of the debate, the grey areas of the debate, with underdeveloped arguments being brought to the foreground and in highlighting the arguments that are likely to emerge in the future as key contenders. It observes the semantic diversity and ethical ambiguity, the academic lop-sidedness of the debate, missing contextual setting, need for interdisciplinary approaches, public engagement, and region-specific assessment of ethical issues. Recommendations are made to provide a useful platform for the second generation of geoengineering ethicists to help advance the debate to more decisive domains with the required clarity and caution.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Two Generations Of Argumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Ethics of Geoengineering: A Literature Review

Pamplany¹,

Gordijn

Brereton

2020

Sci Eng Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The politics and governance of research into solar geoengineering

McLaren

Corry

2021

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research into solar geoengineering, far from being societally neutral, is already highly intertwined with its emerging politics. This review outlines ways in which research conditions or constructs solar geoengineering in diverse ways, including the forms of possible material technologies of solar geoengineering; the criteria and targets for their assessment; the scenarios in which they might be deployed; the publics which may support or oppose them; their political implications for other climate responses, and the international relations, governance mechanisms, and configurations of power that are presumed in order to regulate them. The review also examines proposals for governance of research, including suggested frameworks, principles, procedures, and institutions. It critically assesses these proposals, revealing their limitations given the context of the conditioning effects of current research. The review particularly highlights problems of the reproduction of Northern norms, instrumental approaches to public engagement, a weak embrace of precaution, and a persistent—but questionable—separation of research from deployment. It details complexities inherent in effective research governance which contribute to making the pursuit of solar geoengineering risky, controversial, and ethically contentious. In conclusion, it suggests a case for an explicit, reflexive research governance regime developed with international participation. It suggests that such a regime should encompass modeling and social science, as well as field experimentation, and must address not only technical and environmental, but also the emergent social and political, implications of research. This article is categorized under: Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Knowledge and Practice Policy and Governance > Multilevel and Transnational Climate Change Governance

show abstract

Risk? Crisis? Emergency? Implications of the new climate emergency framing for governance and policy

McHugh

Lemos

Morrison

2021

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term "climate emergency" represents a new phase in climate change framing that many hope will invigorate more climate action. Yet there has been relatively little discussion of how the new emergency framing might shape broader governance and policy. In this advanced review, we critically review and synthesize existing literature on crisis and emergency to inform our understanding of how this new shift might affect governance and policy. Specifically, we explore the literature on crisis governance and policy to argue that there is no simple answer to whether the "climate emergency" framing will be supportive of climate governance and policy; rather, more work needs to be done to understand how different political actors respond according to their perceptions, interests and values. To assist this endeavor, we develop a typology of four policy pathways, ranging from "no emergency," to "no emergency, but recognize risk," "emergency as a threat" and "emergency as an opportunity." We highlight the need to consider the effects of multiple and overlapping emergency frames, using the example of the intersection of climate change and COVID-19. Finally, we suggest new interdisciplinary research directions for critically analyzing and refining this new phase of climate change framing.

show abstract

Solar Geoengineering: Social Science, Legal, Ethical, and Economic Frameworks

Cited by 31 publications

References 135 publications

The Ethics of Geoengineering: A Literature Review

The Ethics of Geoengineering: A Literature Review

The politics and governance of research into solar geoengineering

Risk? Crisis? Emergency? Implications of the new climate emergency framing for governance and policy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About