Geoengineering governance-by-default: an earth system governance perspective

Abstract

Geoengineering-the deliberate interference in the climate system to affect global warming-could have significant global environmental and social implications. How to shape formal geoengineering governance mechanisms is an issue of debate. This paper describes and analyses the geoengineering governance landscape that has developed in the absence of explicit geoengineering regulation. An Earth Systems Governance perspective provides insight into the formation of norms resulting from an overlap in international treaties and from the actions of engaged non-state agents. Specifically, the paper explores the instruments and actors having effect in existing formal and informal geoengineering governance mechanisms. It finds that geoengineering is subject to a form of 'governance-by-default'. This is due to a situation in which state actors have not resolved the tension between two legal norms: that of 'caution' and that of 'harm minimisation'. This governance-bydefault is characterised by uneven regulation from existing multilateral agreements established for other purposes, an absence of regulation specifically focused on geoengineering, guidance from an international ambition to hold global average warming below two-degrees Celsius and to achieve net-zero emissions in the second half of the century, and strong normative engagement by the research community. Governance-bydefault is likely to be a stopgap development until more enduring and focused governance emerges.

Impact of Geography on Adaptation for the Future Sustainability of Human Society on Earth

“…Human societies should continue to spearhead local level decisions making processes to encourage local communities to regulate land use patterns, prevent the destruction of vegetation and introduction of alien species, reduce atmos-pheric gases, and prevent the disposal of toxic substances into the environment (Diamond, 2005;Nelson, 2010). At the international level, top-down decision making such as international conventions and agreements must continue to provide a platform to engage multi-stakeholders including, geographers in decisions and actions that regulate human activities on the Earth (Talberg et al, 2018). These actions should include the expansion of effort to control greenhouse gas emissions, and disposal of toxics, engage timber companies in multi-scale tree planting to capture carbon, improve developments in aquaculture, manage global climate change, and reduce the proliferation of nuclear weapons, world insecurity and biodiversity loss (Diamond, 2005;Page, 2005;Rands et al, 2010;UNDP, 2011a).…”

Political Perspectives on Geoengineering: Navigating Problem Definition and Institutional Fit

“…It is surprising that they are not more front and centre in the corresponding academic literature. With some notable exceptions (Brent et al 2015, Talberg et al 2018, norms are mostly addressed as something that still needs to be developed in order to govern emerging technologies. Yet the work that existing norms do in steering government behaviour determines which debates and discussions can be initiated in the first place.…”

Sulfur in the Sky with Diamonds: An Inquiry into the Feasibility of Solar Geoengineering

“…This article concentrates on SG, the most debated branch of CE approaches. It investigates its feasibility, in order to understand if this technology, still in an embryonic phase and so far largely consisting of research conducted through computer modeling (Niemeier and Tilmes, ), might at some point in the future be politically practicable, despite current widespread fears of its ungovernability (Talberg et al., ).…”