Developing countries must lead on solar geoengineering research

Rahman, A. Atiq; Artaxo, Paulo; Asrat, Asfawossen; Parker, Andy

doi:10.1038/d41586-018-03917-8

Cited by 71 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They include: the moral hazard dilemma, i.e., that development and deployment of alternative solutions might decrease effort on emission reductions (Preston, 2013;McLaren, 2016); the risk of premature lock-in of suboptimal solutions and path dependencies (Burns et al, 2016;Reynolds et al, 2016); and concerns regarding controllability and transnational effects (Williamson and Bodle, 2016). Ethical issues are also important, relating to informed consent and potential adverse impacts on countries unable to deploy such measures (Svoboda, 2012;Suarez and van Aalst, 2017;Rahman et al, 2018); and vested interests, as production and deployment of innovative measures could be a highly profitable market (Preston, 2013). Controversies related to the "protection of biota and ecosystems" and "manipulation to enhance biological and ecological adaptation" areas of action mostly arise from conflicts relating to local, national and globalscale interests, and the balance between short-term and longterm benefits and disbenefits (Cooley et al, 2016;Cormier-Salem and Panfili, 2016).…”

Section: Ocean Governance Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ocean Solutions to Address Climate Change and Its Effects on Marine Ecosystems

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Paris Agreement target of limiting global surface warming to 1.5-2 • C compared to pre-industrial levels by 2100 will still heavily impact the ocean. While ambitious mitigation and adaptation are both needed, the ocean provides major opportunities for action to reduce climate change globally and its impacts on vital ecosystems and ecosystem services. A comprehensive and systematic assessment of 13 global-and local-scale, ocean-based measures was performed to help steer the development and implementation of technologies and actions toward a sustainable outcome. We show that (1) all measures have tradeoffs and multiple criteria must be used for a comprehensive assessment of their potential, (2) greatest benefit is derived by combining global and local solutions, some of which could be implemented or scaled-up immediately, (3) some measures are too uncertain to be recommended yet, (4) political consistency must be achieved through effective cross-scale governance mechanisms, (5) scientific effort must focus on effectiveness, co-benefits, disbenefits, and costs of poorly tested as well as new and emerging measures.

show abstract

Section: Ocean Governance Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ocean Solutions to Address Climate Change and Its Effects on Marine Ecosystems

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This may be carried out in the framework of specific impact models applied to local cities or regions and would hence benefit from local knowledge, especially in the developing world where resources for adaptation measures are scarce. Linkages between the developing world climate impacts researchers and the GeoMIP community will be encouraged and funded by the Developing Country Impacts Modelling Analysis for SRM (DECIMALS) project (Rahman et al, 2018). Scientists from developing countries are encouraged to apply DECIMALS to model the solar geoengineering impacts that matter most to their regions.…”

Section: Summary and Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global streamflow and flood response to stratospheric aerosol geoengineering

Wei

Miao

et al. 2018

Atmos. Chem. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Flood risk is projected to increase under future warming climates due to an enhanced hydrological cycle. Solar geoengineering is known to reduce precipitation and slow down the hydrological cycle and may therefore be expected to offset increased flood risk. We examine this hypothesis using streamflow and river discharge responses to Representative Concentration Pathway 4.5 (RCP4.5) and the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) G4 scenarios. Compared with RCP4.5, streamflow on the western sides of Eurasia and North America is increased under G4, while the eastern sides see a decrease. In the Southern Hemisphere, the northern parts of landmasses have lower streamflow under G4, and streamflow of southern parts increases relative to RCP4.5. We furthermore calculate changes in 30-, 50-, and 100-year flood return periods relative to the historical (1960–1999) period under the RCP4.5 and G4 scenarios. Similar spatial patterns are produced for each return period, although those under G4 are closer to historical values than under RCP4.5. Hence, in general, solar geoengineering does appear to reduce flood risk in most regions, but the overall effects are largely determined by this large-scale geographic pattern. Although G4 stratospheric aerosol geoengineering ameliorates the Amazon drying under RCP4.5, with a weak increase in soil moisture, the decreased runoff and streamflow leads to an increased flood return period under G4 compared with RCP4.5.

show abstract

“…They argue that there is only so much that developing countries can do to advance mitigation and that the primary actors on this front are in the Global North. If temperatures keep rising, the benefits of stratospheric aerosol injection may outweigh its drawbacks (Rahman et al 2018). In their study of non-western perspectives, Carr and Yung (2018) come to a similar conclusion.…”

Section: Climate Engineering Least Developed Countries and The Long-mentioning

confidence: 92%

Rich man’s solution? Climate engineering discourses and the marginalization of the Global South

Biermann

Möller

2019

Int Environ Agreements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous recent studies project that 'climate engineering' technologies might need to play a major role in the future. Such technologies may carry major risks for developing countries that are often especially vulnerable to, and lack adaptive capacity to deal with, the impacts of such new technologies. In this situation, one would expect that developing countriesespecially the least developed countries that are most vulnerable-should play a central role in the emerging discourse on climate engineering. And yet, as this article shows in detail, the discussion about whether and how to engage with these technologies is shaped by experts from just a small set of countries in the Global North. Knowledge production around climate engineering remains heavily dominated by the major research institutions in North America and Europe. Drawing on information from 70 climate engineering events between 2009 and 2017 along with extensive document analysis, the article maps a lack of involvement of developing countries and highlights the degree to which their concerns remain insufficiently represented in politically significant scientific assessment reports. The article concludes by sketching options that developing countries may have to influence the agenda on climate engineering, reflecting on earlier attempts to increase control over novel technologies and influence global agenda setting.

show abstract

Developing countries must lead on solar geoengineering research

Cited by 71 publications

References 5 publications

Ocean Solutions to Address Climate Change and Its Effects on Marine Ecosystems

Ocean Solutions to Address Climate Change and Its Effects on Marine Ecosystems

Global streamflow and flood response to stratospheric aerosol geoengineering

Rich man’s solution? Climate engineering discourses and the marginalization of the Global South

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About