Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

5 Solar Geoengineering Research Governance
Pages 159-190

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 159...
... There can be some inherent tensions among different governance goals. For instance, efforts to build trust and legitimacy through extensive public engagement could lead to some constraints on the goal of producing socially beneficial knowledge or could add to the costs of research.
From page 160...
... At a minimum, domestic and international governance should complement each other. Governance mechanisms and principles developed domestically can be informative to policy makers developing international governance mechanisms and may be developed and implemented more quickly than international efforts.
From page 161...
... Solar Geoengineering Research Governance TABLE 5.1 Governance Mechanisms Discussed in This Chapter Governance Goals/Principles Served Relevant Actor(s) Discussed in this Chapter Mechanism by This Mechanism Recommendations code of conduct responsible science, 5.1a, 5.1b, 5.1c researchers, funders of research, effective practices national institutions registry transparency, 5.1d, 5.1e, 5.1p nations, researchers, funders of information sharing research, scientific publishers, appropriate international body data sharing transparency, 5.1j, 5.1k researchers, funders of research, information sharing publishers assessments and risk assessment, impact 5.1f, 5.1g, 5.1h, 5.1o nations, funders of research, reviews assessment, strengthen appropriate UN body or bodies science, transparency, public engagement permitting transparency, oversight 5.1i nations intellectual property information sharing 5.1l researchers participation inclusivity, public 5.1m, 5.1n, 5.1t, 5.1u individuals, institutions, nations, and stakeholder engagement, researchers, funders of research, engagement transparency appropriate international and regional governance bodies international coordination of 5.1q funders of research, researchers cooperation and research, joint research co-development on projects/programs research teams international coordination of 5.1r science agencies cooperation among research, information national scientific sharing, joint research agencies projects/programs international coordination of 5.1s coalition of state and non-state information sharing research, information actors and cooperation sharing, transparency, on SG research and participation, and research governance public engagement international risk assessment, 5.1v UN body or other international anticipatory effective practices, institution governance expert conflict resolution committee 161
From page 162...
... Nevertheless, it is conceivable that certain international institutions other than treaty bodies (e.g., international scientific organizations) could initiate voluntarily collaborative research and research governance activities in the short term.
From page 163...
... It could also request action by one or more UN convention or treaty bodies to take up SG, as it has on other issues in the past. UNEA, or another relevant UN convention or treaty body, could also request a study of SG -- or ongoing assessment or monitoring of the state of the science and technology -- from an allied international scientific body such as the World Meteorological Organization (WMO)
From page 164...
... Mission Innovation is also tracking both public expenditures and private-sector investments in clean energy, providing an important window into this important world of climate related technology development. There are also a number of existing international scientific bodies that could serve as platforms for international cooperation and address some aspects of SG governance; for instance: • The International Science Council (ISC)
From page 165...
... While there are thus numerous potential models for collaboration, to date the vast majority of nations have not expressed formal views on the benefits and risks of SG research or on the merits and international architecture of research governance. It is quite possible that many national governments and civil society institutions may decide to oppose an expanded SG research enterprise, based on ethical, geopolitical, or scientific risk assessment grounds, and try to constrain efforts to create international governance practices and institutions.
From page 166...
... 5.2 NATIONAL/DOMESTIC RESEARCH GOVERNANCE In light of the limited applicability of existing U.S. law to much SG research, particularly with regard to research that has little to no anticipated physical impacts, it is important to consider other mechanisms for the domestic governance of SG research, as discussed below.
From page 167...
... An international scientific society could assist in the development of a code of conduct. For example, the International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR)
From page 168...
... . Outdoor experiments or field tests warrant particular attention to transparency because of their potential physical impacts, 168
From page 169...
... In the medical field, for example, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) established in 2005 a policy requiring researchers, as a condition of consideration for publication, to post information about clinical trials in an approved public registry at the time of or before patient enrollment (Laine et al., 2007)
From page 170...
... As mentioned previously, the ICMJE "requires, and recommends that all medical journal editors require, registration of clinical trials in a public trials registry at or before the time of first patient enrollment as a condition of consideration for publication....The ICMJE recommends that journals publish the trial registration number at the end of the abstract."9 Recommendation 5.1d: A national public SG research registry should be created to collect information on all public- and private-sector SG research. Recommendation 5.1e: Once a national SG research registry is established, SG researchers should participate in the registry, and 6  Seehttps://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/ghg-reporting-program-data-sets.
From page 171...
... . Public comment opportunities alone, however, do not ensure effective public engagement; it is likewise important to develop mechanisms that help ensure policy decisions about research directions and priorities are responsive to public engagement (Jinnah, 2018)
From page 172...
... Such assessments, which should be revised on a regular basis, should incorporate broad and meaningful public engagement and protocols for public engagement. Recommendation 5.1h: As a condition of funding for any proposed outdoor SG experiments, research funders should require independent peer review of the research and an assessment of the plausible impacts of the research.
From page 173...
... Some SG field experiments would be subject to this reporting requirement, but the WMRA does not require a permit for weather modification activity, and such experiments may not trigger state permitting requirements for weather modification. In the case of SG research, a permit requirement can promote information gathering on SG research activities and increase their transparency, ensure that harmful impacts are minimized, and provide public assurance that research is being undertaken in a responsible manner.
From page 174...
... Sharing of SG research data on both a national and international level offers many benefits. Data sharing enables other scientists to reproduce or replicate reported work, strengthening scientific rigor.
From page 175...
... ; and the Multinational Coordinated Arabidopsis thaliana Genome Research Project12 included a plan for data sharing, and the National Science Foundation (NSF) implemented data sharing requirements through the grant process.
From page 176...
... , promote transparency, and foster public engagement. Pledges not to assert patents have been made with respect to open source software, information and communication technologies, environmental technologies, and life science technologies (Contreras, 2015)
From page 177...
... Participation and Stakeholder Engagement If SG research evolves from its current fragmented state to a full-scale research enterprise, then ambitious, inclusive, and effective public and stakeholder engagement will be important for the development of an SG research enterprise that could be widely viewed as legitimate, useful, and deserving of public support. Public engagement can "improve the quality [and]
From page 178...
... may trigger needs for dedicated public engagement efforts to build trust and understand what is permissible to the public and what is not. Public engagement in SG research is supported by normative, instrumental, and substantive rationales (Flegal et al., 2019; see also Fiorino, 1990)
From page 179...
... Rather, these should be developed in consultation with engagement experiments and stakeholder groups, draw upon lessons from efforts to develop and test approaches to public engagement in SG research (see Box 5.1)
From page 180...
... This approach is broadly consistent with the nonbinding "involve" level of public engagement described in Table 5.2, and it could provide valuable opportunities to gain insights and inform the design of other future engagement efforts related to outdoor SG experiments. Such efforts do of course point to many questions that will need to be explored -- for instance, regarding the effectiveness of the engagement processes utilized, the criteria used to assess effectiveness, and the appropriate scope of engagement and scope of concerns to consider in this engagement.
From page 181...
... (2015) argue that greater geographical diversity, including broader engagement by researchers and experts from the Global South, will be important in "defining the most relevant climate engineering problems; designing models and experiments that best study them; collecting climate data where there are current gaps; and facilitating the exchange between experts and the broader society." Recommendation 5.1m: Public and stakeholder engagement in significant SG research and research governance decisions can enhance the legitimacy and effectiveness of SG research programs.
From page 182...
... Nonetheless, an authoritative international survey that gauges the scale and scope of SG research activities would be valuable. For those concerned that research on geoengineering could displace GHG mitigation research, an assessment of geoengineering research -- particularly if updated annually -- could provide an important benchmark 20  Franz Xaver Perrez, Head, International Affairs Division, Switzerland's Federal Office and Lecturer of International Environmental Law, University of Bern School of Law, Remarks Before the Committee, July 22, 2019.
From page 183...
... Recommendation 5.1p: An international registry or other reporting mechanism on SG research should be created and administered through an appropriate international body. Data should be gathered through a number of means, including at the country level, with each participating nation responsible for gathering information on all research, based on inputs from individual researchers and from civil society organizations tracking SG activity.
From page 184...
... , carried out in the early 2000s. The LBA's ecology mission, sponsored by NASA in collaboration with the government of Brazil, was "designed to better understand cycles of water, energy, carbon and nutrients, resulting from the changes in Amazonian vegetation cover, and associated climatic and environmental consequences at local, regional, and global scales."21 LBA-Ecology science teams trained more than 500 students and were "involved in transferring of appropriate technological skills and capacity building in collaboration with graduate programs in Brazilian and South American institutions through a variety of initiatives." The LBA "provided infra-structure and financial support for a large number of scientific related activities for capability enhancement and dissemination of science."22 Recommendation 5.1q: Funders of SG research should promote international cooperation -- including with participants from the Global South -- within research teams by giving priority to research efforts 21  See https://geo.arc.nasa.gov/sg/lba.html.
From page 185...
... Ideally, participants would include both nations that are funding SG research and members of the broader research community from countries that do not have national-level research programs. Some potential models for international coordination among national funding agencies include the Belmont Forum23 and the Multinational Coordinated Arabidopsis thaliana Genome Research Project.24 Cooperative activities may enhance international coordination among scientists and create a conduit for promoting best practices, even in the absence of "hard" governance institutions (Reynolds et al., 2017)
From page 186...
... Nevertheless, there are pathways to achieving substantial international cooperation on climate-related governance among countries.25 The CCAC, Mission Innovation, and other similar multilateral climate-focused institutions have demonstrated, with varying degrees of success, the potential for a group of self-selected countries to identify and collectively address a neglected and important area of needed environmental cooperation; pool resources; develop a common understanding of risk; coordinate research (by promoting efficiency, avoiding redundancy, saving money, identifying research gaps, etc.) ; and create global norms of transparency, accountability, and responsibility.
From page 187...
... It is expected that the responsible parties in each country would be identified by their national governments, and, as has been the case with similar efforts in the past, full participation from each country would be worked out at an intergovernmental level. Public and Stakeholder Engagement Mechanisms to foster public engagement in SG research may be more feasible to implement at the national level, given the limitations of international conventions and agreements.
From page 188...
... Mechanisms have evolved to help explain new and emerging technologies to broader audiences and gauge civic reactions to these technologies. In the field of synthetic biology, for example, NSF funded the Multi-Site Public Engagement with Science–Synthetic Biology project (MSPES)
From page 189...
... Comparisons can be made among countries, continents, and different groupings, such as developing and developed countries. The results are subsequently analyzed and presented to policy makers.a World Wide Views is coordinated by the Danish Board of Technology in collaboration with the World Wide Views Alliance, a global network of partners including public councils, think tanks, parliamentary technology assessment institutions, nongovernmental civil society organizations, and universities.b A list of the countries and partners that have participated in the three global consultations (World Wide Views on Global Warming [2009]
From page 190...
... in anticipation of or response to SG field tests with transboundary effects or actual SG deployment; • which existing international conventions, treaties, or agreements and associated governance regimes could have jurisdiction in the case of SG field tests with transboundary effects or actual deployment; • the strengths and weaknesses of possible institutional settings for making international decisions on SG research and research governance; • the potential for SG research and possible SG deployment to exacerbate or ameliorate global inequalities; • both the possibility and ethical permissibility of various approaches to address harm and compensation issues, including harms that may arise with SG field tests with transboundary effects or as a result of SG deployment in the absence of the existence of an applicable international liability mechanism (see discussion in Chapter 2) ; • the adequacy of existing resources for capacity building related to SG research in developing countries, and advisability of opening some existing pools of climate finance to SG research or establishing new sources of funding; and • the intergenerational implications of SG research, development, and potential deployment -- examining, for example, how to take into account principles of intergenerational equity, considering the intergenerational benefits and burdens associated with SG, as well as the institutional challenges that would be involved in a multigenerational SG deployment (including initiation, monitoring and ongoing management, and eventual termination)


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.