Moratoria for Global Governance and Contested Technology: The Case of Climate Engineering

Parson, Edward A.; Herzog, Megan M.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2763378

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While SRM is also likely to redress regional temperatures and precipitation trends (Curry et al, 2014), lower temperatures and sea-level rise (Moore et al, 2010), curb the frequency as well as the magnitude of tropical cyclones (Moore et al, 2015), and lead to increased plant productivity (Herzog and Parson, 2016) among others. Hypothetically speaking, the reduction and general alteration in the global hydrological cycle as a result of SRM application will have an enormous impact (positive or negative) on livelihood options.…”

Section: Srm Specification For Africa: Policy Practice and Livelihood Optionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Solar Geoengineering for the Developing World: A Discourse on the State of Research and the Effects on Policy and Livelihoods for Africa

Patrick

2021

AJIMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The world is experiencing a rapid increase in the global average temperatures at an unprecedented level, primarily due to human activities. Global actors' and policymakers' inability to find an agreed upon course of action to curtail the looming effects of these increased temperatures is an issue of global environmental and human security concern. Solar geoengineering, also solar radiation modification (SRM), has been proposed in many quarters as an option to reducing global warming while finding other alternatives to GHG emissions. This paper provides a summary introduction to climate science on solar engineering for the social scientists and policymakers from the global south. The paper assesses the status, effects, and preparedness of developing economies, especially Africa, in adopting SRM policies and practices. It observes that the effects of SRM for Africa have not been adequately researched due to the dearth of research and experts on SRM, specifically for Africa. It concludes that the reliance of a significant proportion of developing societies on climate-sensitive livelihood options makes the implication of SRM a worthy consideration for research and policymakers.

show abstract

Section: Srm Specification For Africa: Policy Practice and Livelihood Optionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Solar Geoengineering for the Developing World: A Discourse on the State of Research and the Effects on Policy and Livelihoods for Africa

Patrick

2021

AJIMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Toward an evidence‐informed, responsible, and inclusive debate on solar geoengineering: A response to the proposed non‐use agreement

Parson,

Buck,

Jinnah

et al. 2024

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A prominent recent perspective article in this journal and accompanying open letter propose a broad international “non‐use agreement” (NUA) on activities related to solar geoengineering (SG). The NUA calls on governments to renounce large‐scale use of SG, and also to refuse to fund SG research, ban outdoor experiments, decline to grant IP rights, and reject discussions of SG in international organizations. We argue that such pre‐emptive rejection of public research and consultation would deprive future policy‐makers of knowledge and capability that would support informed decisions to safely and equitably limit climate risk, sustain human welfare, and protect threatened ecosystems. In contrast to the broad prohibitions of the NUA, we propose an alternative near‐term pathway with five elements: assess SG risks and benefits in the context of related climate risks and responses; distinguish the risks and governance needs of SG research and deployment; pursue research that treats uncertainties and divergent results even‐handedly; harness normalization of SG as a path to effective assessment and governance; and build a more globally inclusive conversation on SG and its governance. These principles would support a more informed, responsible, and inclusive approach to limiting climate risks, including judgments on the potential role or rejection of SG, than the prohibitory approach of the NUA.This article is categorized under: Climate and Development > Social Justice and the Politics of Development Policy and Governance > Multilevel and Transnational Climate Change Governance Policy and Governance > National Climate Change Policy

show abstract

Moratoria for Global Governance and Contested Technology: The Case of Climate Engineering

Abstract: ABSTRACT

Cited by 2 publications

References 59 publications

Review of Solar Geoengineering for the Developing World: A Discourse on the State of Research and the Effects on Policy and Livelihoods for Africa

Review of Solar Geoengineering for the Developing World: A Discourse on the State of Research and the Effects on Policy and Livelihoods for Africa

Toward an evidence‐informed, responsible, and inclusive debate on solar geoengineering: A response to the proposed non‐use agreement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About