A scenario of solar geoengineering governance: Vulnerable states demand, and act

Schenuit, Felix; Gilligan, Jonathan M.; Viswamohanan, Anjali

doi:10.1016/j.futures.2021.102809

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent studies using scenario methods explore more creative deployment options-geoengineering springing from a demand by vulnerable states (Schenuit et al, 2021), or scenarios that involve the private sector or decentralized grassroots groups as actors (Parson and Reynolds, 2021). Yet in general, these studies also emphasize the geopolitical risks of solar geoengineering, rather than geopolitical opportunities.…”

Section: Background: Solar Geoengineering Through the Lens Of Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Peacebuilding and Solar Geoengineering

Buck

2022

Front. Clim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Solar geoengineering, or reflecting incoming sunlight to cool the planet, has been viewed by international relations and governance scholars as an approach that could exacerbate conflict. It has not been examined through the framework of environmental peacebuilding, which examines how and when environmental challenges can lead to cooperation rather than conflict. This article argues that scholars should treat the link between solar geoengineering and conflict as a hypothesis rather than a given, and evenly examine both hypotheses: that solar geoengineering could lead to conflict, and that it could lead to peace. The article examines scenarios in which geoengineering may lead to negative peace—peace defined as the absence of conflict—and then applies a theoretical framework developed by environmental peacebuilding scholars to look at how solar geoengineering could relate to three trajectories of environmental peacebuilding. A peace lens for solar geoengineering matters for research and policy right now, because focusing narrowly on conflict in both research and policy might miss opportunities to understand and further scenarios for environmental peacebuilding. The paper concludes with suggestions for how research program managers, funders, and policymakers could incorporate environmental peacebuilding aims into their work.

show abstract

Section: Background: Solar Geoengineering Through the Lens Of Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Peacebuilding and Solar Geoengineering

Buck

2022

Front. Clim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such a development is not very likely but remains a possibility. In this governance archetype, global GHG emissions will continue to rise following a business-asusual trajectory in many countries, possibly at a certain point being countered by last-minute technological interventions for dealing with global warming conducted by countries most affected by climate change impacts, such as geoengineering (Schenuit et al, 2021).…”

Section: Governance Archetype Four: Breakdown Of Global Climate Coope...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring Global Climate Policy Futures and Their Representation in Integrated Assessment Models

Hickmann

Bertram

Biermann

et al. 2022

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Paris Agreement, adopted in 2015, paved the way for a new hybrid global climate governance architecture with both bottom-up and top-down elements. While governments can choose individual climate goals and actions, a global stocktake and a ratcheting-up mechanism have been put in place with the overall aim to ensure that collective efforts will prevent increasing adverse impacts of climate change. Integrated assessment models show that current combined climate commitments and policies of national governments fall short of keeping global warming to 1.5 °C or 2 °C above preindustrial levels. Although major greenhouse gas emitters, such as China, the European Union, India, the United States under the Biden administration, and several other countries, have made new pledges to take more ambitious climate action, it is highly uncertain where global climate policy is heading. Scenarios in line with long-term temperature targets typically assume a simplistic and hardly realistic level of harmonization of climate policies across countries. Against this backdrop, this article develops four archetypes for the further evolution of the global climate governance architecture and matches them with existing sets of scenarios developed by integrated assessment models. By these means, the article identifies knowledge gaps in the current scenario literature and discusses possible research avenues to explore the pre-conditions for successful coordination of national policies towards achieving the long-term target stipulated in the Paris Agreement.

show abstract

What to Consider When Considering Solar Geoengineering

Power

2025

Geoengineering and Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A scenario of solar geoengineering governance: Vulnerable states demand, and act

Cited by 5 publications

References 20 publications

Environmental Peacebuilding and Solar Geoengineering

Environmental Peacebuilding and Solar Geoengineering

Exploring Global Climate Policy Futures and Their Representation in Integrated Assessment Models

What to Consider When Considering Solar Geoengineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About