Book contents
- Reviews
- Pandora’s Toolbox
- Pandora’s Toolbox
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Prologue
- Acknowledgments
- Section I Climate Introduction
- Section II Responses to Climate Change
- Section III Carbon Dioxide Removal
- Section IV Solar Radiation Management
- Section V Social Ramifications of Climate Intervention
- 16 Governance of Carbon Removal
- 17 Governance of SRM and SAI
- 18 Ethics
- 19 Public Perception
- Section VI The Path Forward
- Acronyms
- Appendix: Detail in respect of Figures 9.4–9.8
- Notes
- Index
17 - Governance of SRM and SAI
from Section V - Social Ramifications of Climate Intervention
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 February 2022
- Reviews
- Pandora’s Toolbox
- Pandora’s Toolbox
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Prologue
- Acknowledgments
- Section I Climate Introduction
- Section II Responses to Climate Change
- Section III Carbon Dioxide Removal
- Section IV Solar Radiation Management
- Section V Social Ramifications of Climate Intervention
- 16 Governance of Carbon Removal
- 17 Governance of SRM and SAI
- 18 Ethics
- 19 Public Perception
- Section VI The Path Forward
- Acronyms
- Appendix: Detail in respect of Figures 9.4–9.8
- Notes
- Index
Summary
In contrast to CDR, the institutions seeking to govern emissions reductions seem poorly suited to govern SRM and specifically SAI. SAI does not fall squarely under the jurisdiction of any existing international treaties, and even domestic laws provide few constraints. Voluntary norms such as the Oxford Principles are not yet codified into agreed obligations. Harvard’s intended SCoPEx experiment demonstrates the great trepidation with which SAI is perceived. Attempts to curtail pre-deployment field research generally rest on faulty assumptions, including a presumed slippery slope, technological lock-in, fears of covert or non-state deployment, weaponization, and a blurry line between research and deployment. Without robust research, there is a danger that future climate emergencies may be met with rash and risky deployment. Therefore, global institutions are needed to encourage, fund, and vet research and ensure its transparency. Deployment itself would require new, empowered international institutions to coordinate the program and monitor its effects. While sovereign national deployment efforts by major powers are a salient paradigm, a better outcome for both nature and humanity would be a single global monopolist deployer acting on behalf of the world. Such a unitary global effort would have enormous implications for the international order.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Pandora's ToolboxThe Hopes and Hazards of Climate Intervention, pp. 264 - 280Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022