The Public and Geoengineering Decision-Making

Abstract

In response to the Royal Society report’s claim that “the acceptability of geo­engineering will be determined as much by social, legal, and political issues as by scientific and technical factors” (Geoengineering the Climate: Science, Governance and Uncertainty [London: Royal Society, 2009], ix), a number of authors have suggested the key to this challenge is to engage the public in geoengineering decision-making. In effect, some have argued that inclusion of the public in geoengineering decision-making is necessary for any geoengineering project to be morally permissible. Yet, while public engagement on geoengineering comes in various forms, the discussion in geoengineering governance and the ethics of geoengineering have too often conceptualized it exclusively in terms of public participation in decision-making, and supported it by various liberal democratic values. However, if the predominant understanding of public engagement on—or, the role of the public in—geoengineering decision-making is indeed only grounded on liberal democratic values, then its normative relevance could be challenged by and in other ethical-political traditions that do not share those values. In this paper, I shall explore these questions from a Confucian perspective. I argue that the liberal democratic values invoked in support of the normative importance of public participation are, at least, foreign to Confucian political philosophy. This presents a prima facie challenge to view public participation in geoengineering decision-making as a universal moral requirement, and invites us to reconsider the normative significance of this form of public engagement in Confucian societies. Yet, I contend that the role of the public remains normatively significant in geoengineering governance and the ethics of geoengineering from a Confucian perspective. Drawing from recent work on Confucian political philosophy, I illustrate the potential normative foundation for public engagement on geoengineering decision-making.

Unintended Side Effects of the Digital Transition: European Scientists’ Messages from a Proposition-Based Expert Round Table

“…Another issue may be linked to "public engagement-communication, consultation, and participation," which also refers to "transdisciplinary discussion in unwanted societal changes as well as a shift in science from analog to digital modeling and structure." Obviously, following a meritocratic system for deliberations, the roles and decisions of virtuous and capable leaders play a much larger role than in Western societies [137,139,140]. Thus, the role of academia in (transdisciplinary) practice-science dialogues in Japan may be more important than in Western countries.…”

Public Rental Housing Governance in Urban China

“…Besides the aforementioned satisfaction level with housing quantity and housing quality, another important aspect to social stability is whether the recipients of public goods want to participate in the PRH governance. Literature has confirmed the participation of recipients into governance can bring concerns from them in the decision-making processes and to contribute to a more transparent and effective bureaucracy system in the eyes of people (Arnstein, 1969;Wong, 2013).…”

Public Rental Housing Governance in Urban China

“…Besides the aforementioned satisfaction level with housing quantity and housing quality, another important aspect to social stability is whether the recipients of public goods want to participate in the PRH governance. Literature has confirmed the participation of recipients into governance can bring concerns from them in the decision-making processes and to contribute to a more transparent and effective bureaucracy system in the eyes of people (Arnstein, 1969;Wong, 2013).…”