Abstract

As climate change’s risks have grown and limits to primary responses become evident, solar geoengineering (or solar radiation modification) has risen in prominence as a potential complementary response. Widespread calls for expanded research have raised objections, based on anticipated links to potential future deployment and potentially harmful interactions with other climate responses. The unique concerns raised by solar geoengineering may warrant governing associated research with more care or scrutiny than other areas, but states have not engaged the issue. Given this, we analyze the potential for nonstate actors to provide governance functions needed to enable, control, and legitimate near-term, small-scale solar geoengineering research. Drawing on the theory of regulatory processes and nonstate actors as well as evidence from other issue areas, we describe six types of nonstate actors in terms of their capacity, knowledge, and interests relevant to governing solar geoengineering research: researchers themselves, the universities or other institutions that employ them, funders, academic publishers, professional societies, and advocacy nongovernmental organizations. We conclude that suitably configured collaborations among these actors can meet the additional governance needs of near-term solar geoengineering research. We consider potential limitations to nonstate governance related to legitimacy, effectiveness, and capture, and conclude that these are not severe under present conditions, but could become stronger if research grows toward deployment. Nonstate governance may even be preferable to state regulation of small-scale scientific activities, offering more flexible early exploration of options with the possibility of later transition into more state-led and legalized governance arrangements.

Highlights

  • As the gravity of climate change risks and the insufficiency of likely responses become clearer, solar geoengineering has increased in prominence and controversy

  • Nonstate governance of solar geoengineering research will be subject to several objections and limitations

  • We conclude that suitably configured collaborations among relevant nonstate actors— including researchers, their institutions, funders, academic publishers, professional societies, and advocacy nongovernmental organizations (NGOs)—can effectively and legitimately meet the additional governance needs of near-term solar geoengineering research. This applies to governance of research—not to potential future deployment proposals, nor to future, larger-scale activities with stronger direct impacts, significant transboundary effects, or linkages to other elements of climate response

Read more

Summary

Introduction

As the gravity of climate change risks and the insufficiency of likely responses become clearer, solar geoengineering ( called solar radiation management or modification) has increased in prominence and controversy. Many observers have called for expanded research, including small field experiments Even those that would pose negligible environmental risk have raised controversy and opposition, principally due to social, political, and governance challenges raised by potential future operational use (Reynolds 2019). Many governance needs are not unique to solar geoengineering but common to many areas: e.g., providing and prioritizing resources; evaluating scientific merit; assessing and controlling direct environment, health, and safety risks; ensuring integrity; and promoting open dissemination of research aims, methods, and results These are routinely provided by existing regulations, program management, and self-regulatory procedures such as peer review (Burger and Gundlach 2018). In the absence of effective state leadership, nonstate actors may be able to provide the governance necessary for near-term research to proceed

Nonstate governance: solar geoengineering and elsewhere
Researchers
Research institutions
Funders
Publishers
Professional societies
Advocacy nongovernmental organizations
Required governance functions
Outline of a nonstate governance system
Limitations
Conclusions
Compliance with ethical standards
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.