Solar radiation management and the governance of hubris

Issues in Environmental Science and Technology

Volumn 2014-January, Issue 38, 2014, Pages 212-248

  Owen, Richard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EXETER BUSINESS SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ENGINEERING GEOLOGY; GEOPOLITICS; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT; MANAGEMENT PRACTICE; POLITICAL CHANGE; RESEARCH WORK; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOLAR RADIATION; STAKEHOLDER;

EID: 84937414946     PISSN: 13507583     EISSN: 14651874     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. L. White Jr, The historical roots of our ecological crisis, Science, 1967, 155(3767), 1203-1207.
2. A. Corner, K. Parkhill, N. Pidgeon and N. Vaughan, Messing with nature? Exploring public perceptions of geoengineering in the UK, Global Environ. Change, 2013, 23(5), 938-947.
3. D. Jamieson, Ethics and Intentional climate change, Clim. Change, 1996, 33, 323-336.
4. P. Macnaghten and B. Szerszynski, Living the global social experiment: an analysis of public discourse on solar radiation management and its implications for governance, Global Environ. Change, 2013, 23(2), 465-474.
5. D. W. Keith, Geoengineering the climate: history and prospect, Ann. Rev. Energy Environ., 2000, 25, 245-284.
6. J. R. Fleming, Fixing the Sky: The Checkered History of Weather and Climate Control, Columbia University Press, New York, 2010.
7. Geoengineering the Climate: Science, Governance and Uncertainty, The Royal Society, 2009; royalsociety.org/uploadedFiles/Royal-Society-Content/policy/publications/2009/8693.pdf (last accessed 4/10/2013).
8. S. M. Gardiner, Is "arming the future" with geoengineering really the lesser evil? Some doubts about the ethics of intentionally manipulating the climate system, in Climate Ethics: Essential Readings, ed. S. M. Gardiner, S. Caney, D. Jamieson and H. Shue, Oxford University Press, London, 2010.
9. D. Scott, Geoengineering and environmental ethics, Nature Educat. Knowledge, 2012, 3(10), 10.
10. SRMGI, Solar Radiation Management: The Governance of Research, The Royal Society/EDF/TWAS, London, 2011; www.srmgi.org/files/2012/01/DES2391-SRMGI-report-web-11112.pdf (last accessed 4/10/2013).
11. P. J. Crutzen, Albedo enhancement by stratospheric sulfur injections: a contribution to resolve a policy dilemma?, Clim. Change, 2006, 77, 211-220.
12. D. W. Keith, E. Parsons and M. Morgan, Research on global sun block needed now, Nature, 2010, 463, 426-427.
13. H. Jonas, The Imperative of Responsibility, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1984.
14. C. Heyward, Situating and abandoning geoengineering: a typology of five responses to dangerous climate change, Political Sci. Politics, 2013, 46, 23-27.
15. O. Boucher, P. M. Forster, N. Gruber, M. Ha-Duong, M. G. Lawrence, T. M. Lenton, A. Maas and E. Vaughan, Rethinking climate engineering categorization in the context of climate change mitigation and adaptation, WIREs Clim. Change, 2014, 5, 23-25.
16. J. Stilgoe, A question of intent, Nature Clim. Change, 2011, 1, 325-326.
17. European Environment Agency (EEA), Late Lessons from Early Warnings: The Precautionary Principle 1896-2000, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxemburg, 2001. www.eea.europa.eu/publications/environmental-issue-report-2001-22 (last accessed 4/10/2013).
18. S. Jasanoff, Technologies of humility: citizen participation in governing science, Minerva, 2003, 41, 223-244.
19. R. Owen, Legitimate conditions for climate engineering, Environ. Sci. Technol., 2011, 45, 9116-9117.
20. A. Stirling, "Opening up" and "closing down": power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology, Sci. Technol. Human Values, 2008, 33, 262-294.
21. R. Olson, Geoengineering for Decision Makers, Science and Technology Innovation Program, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, DC, 2011, pp. 39; www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Geoengineering-for-Decision-Makers-0.pdf (last accessed 7/10/2013).
22. D. Collingridge, The Social Control of Technology, Francis Pinter (Publishers) Ltd, London, 1980, pp. 200.
23. J. Stilgoe, M. Watson and K. Kuo, From Bio to Geo: implications from public engagement with new technologies for geoengineering research governance, PLos Bio., 2013, 11, e1001707.
24. R. Karinen and D. H. Guston, Towards anticipatory governance. The experience with nanotechnology, in Governing Future Technologies. Nanotechnology and the Rise of an Assessment Regime, ed. M. Kaiser, Springer, Dordrecht, Heidelberg, London and New York, 2010.
25. E. Fisher and A. Rip, Responsible innovation: multi-level dynamics and soft intervention practices Responsible Innovation, ed. R. Owen, J. Bessant and M. Heintz, John Wiley, London, 2013, ch. 9, pp. 165-184.
26. R. G. Lee and J. Petts, Adaptive governance for responsible innovation, in Responsible Innovation, ed. R. Owen, J. Bessant and M. Heintz, John Wiley, London, 2013, ch. 8, pp. 143-164.
27. European Commission, Code of Conduct for Responsible Nanotechnologies Research, 2008; ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document-library/pdf-06/nanocode-apr09-en. pdf (last accessed 4/10/2013).
28. B. Szerszynski, M. Kearnes, P. Macnaghten, R. Owen and J. Stilgoe, Why solar radiation management geoengineering and democracy won't mix, Environ. Planning A, 2013, 45(12), 2809-2816.
29. L. Winner, Do artifacts have politics?, Daedalus, 1980, 109(1), 121-136;
30. reprinted in The Social Shaping of Technology, ed. D. A. MacKenzie and J. Wajcman, Open University Press, London, 2nd edn, 1999.
31. W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes and T. J. Pinch, The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1987.
32. M. J. van den Hoven, Value sensitive design and responsible innovation, in Responsible Innovation, ed. R. Owen, J. Bessant and M. Heintz, John Wiley, London, 2013, ch. 4, pp. 75-84.
33. M. J. van den Hoven, G. J. C. Lokhorst and I. van de Poel, Engineering and the problem of moral overload, Sci. Eng. Ethics, 2012, 18(1), 1-13.
34. Bipartisan Policy Center Task Force on Climate Remediation Research, Geoengineering: A National Strategic Plan for Research on the Potential Effectiveness, Feasibility, and Consequences of Climate Remediation Technologies, 2011; bipartisanpolicy.org/library/report/task-force-climateremediation-research (last accessed 23/9/13).
35. B. Joerges, Do politics have artefacts?, Social Studies Sci., 1999, 29(2), 411.
36. S. Rayner, C. Heyward, T. Kruger, N. Pidgeon, C. Redgwell and J. Savulescu, The Oxford Principles, Clim. Change, 2013, 121, 499-512.
37. T. Kruger, A Commentary on the Oxford Principles: Geoengineering Our Climate Working Paper and Opinion Article Series, 2013; wp. me/p2zsRk-76 (last accessed 4/10/2013).
38. C. Selin, Expectations and the emergence of nanotechnology, Sci. Technol. Human Values, 2007, 32, 196-220.
39. M. Kearnes and A. Rip, The emerging governance landscape of nanotechnology, in Jenseits von Regulierung: Zum Politischen Umgang mit der Nanotechnologie, ed. S. Gammel, A. Lösch and A. Nordmann, Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft, Berlin, 2009, pp. 97-121.
40. GAO, Climate Change: A Coordinated Strategy could Focus Federal Geoengineering Research and Inform Governance Efforts, GAO Report 10-903, 2010; hwww.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-903 (last accessed 4/10/2013).
41. Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineers, Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties, 2004; www.nanotec.org.uk/finalReport.htm (last accessed 4/10/2013).
42. D. R. Morrow, R. E. Kopp and M. Oppenheimer, Toward ethical norms and institutions for climate engineering research, Environ. Res. Lett., 2009, 4, 045106.
43. E. A. Parson and D. W. Keith, End the deadlock on governance of geoengineering research, Science, 2013, 339, 1278-1279.
44. American Meteorological Society, Geoengineering the Climate System; www.ametsoc.org/policy/2013geoengineeringclimate-amsstatement. html (last accessed 6/11/2013).
45. S. Rayner, C. Redgwell, J. Sauvulescu, N. Pidgeon and T. Kruger, Draft Principles for the Conduct of Geoengineering Research (the 'Oxford Principles'), reproduced in House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, The Regulation of Geoengineering, Fifth Report of Session 2009-2010, HC221, pp. 29-30; www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/221/221.pdf (last accessed 4/10/2013).
46. UK House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Engineering, The Regulation of Geoengineering, The Stationery Office, London, 2010; www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/221/221.pdf (last accessed 4/10/2013).
47. UK Government, Government Response to the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee 5th Report of Session 2009-10: The Regulation of Geoengineering, The Stationary Office, London, 2010.
48. Asilomar Scientific Organizing Committee (ASOC), The Asilomar Conference Recommendations on Principles for Research into Climate Engineering Techniques, Climate Institute, Washington DC, 2010, 20006; www.climate.org/PDF/AsilomarConferenceReport.pdf (last accessed 4/10/2013).
49. D. Fiorino, Environmental risk and democratic process: a critical review, Columbia J. Environ. Law, 1989, 14, 501-547.
50. K. Sykes and P. M. Macnaghten, Responsible innovation: opening up dialogue and debate, in Responsible Innovation, ed. R. Owen, J. Bessant and M. Heintz, John Wiley, London, 2013, ch. 5, pp. 85-108.
51. L. Dilling and R. Hauser, Governing geoengineering research: why, when and how?, Clim. Change, 2013, 121, 553-565.
52. R. Owen, J. Stilgoe, P. M. Macnaghten, E. Fisher, M. Gorman and D. H. Guston, A framework for responsible innovation, in Responsible Innovation, ed. R. Owen, J. Bessant and M. Heintz, John Wiley, London, 2013, ch. 2, pp. 27-50.
53. A. Grinbaum and C. Groves, What is "responsible" about responsible innovation? Understanding the ethical issues, in Responsible Innovation, ed. R. Owen, J. Bessant and M. Heintz, John Wiley, London, 2013, ch. 7, pp. 119-142.
54. D. Barben, E. Fisher, C. Selin and D. Guston, Anticipatory governance of nano-technology: foresight, engagement, and integration, in The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, ed. E. Hackett, M. Lynch and J. Wajcman, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 3rd edn, 2008, pp. 979-1000.
55. A. Rip, T. Misa and J. Schot, Managing Technology in Society: The Approach of Constructive Technology Assessment, Thomson, London, 1995.
56. J. Schot and A. Rip, The past and future of constructive technology assessment, Technol. Forecasting Social Change, 1996, 5, 251-268.
57. D. H. Guston and D. Sarewitz, Real-time technology assessment, Technol. Soc., 2002, 24(1), 93-109.
58. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Climate-related Geoengineering and Biodiversity: Technical and Regulatory Matters on Geoengineering in Relation to the CBD, 2010; www.cbd.int/climate/geoengineering (last accessed 4/10/2013).
59. R. J. Cicerone, Geoengineering: encouraging research and overseeing implementation, Clim. Change, 2006, 77(3), 221-226.
60. M. Polanyi, The republic of science: its political and economic theory, Minerva, 1962, 1, 54-74.
61. R. Cooper, Stage-gate systems: a new tool for managing new products, Business Horizons, 1990, 33, 44-54.
62. R. Owen and N. Goldberg, Responsible innovation: a pilot study with the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, Risk Analysis, 2010, 30, 1699-1707.
63. J. Stilgoe, R. Owen and P. M. Macnaghten, Developing a framework for responsible innovation, Res. Policy, 2013, 42(3), 1568-1580.
64. N. Pidgeon, K. Parkhill, A. Corner and N. Vaughan, Deliberating stratospheric aerosols for climate geoengineering and the SPICE project, Nature Clim. Change, 2013, 3, 451-457.
65. R. Owen, P. M. Macnaghten and J. Stilgoe, Responsible research and innovation: from science in society to science for society, with society, Sci. Public Policy, 2012, 39(6), 751-760.
66. P. Macnaghten and R. Owen, Good governance for geoengineering, Nature, 2011, 479, 293.
67. H. E. Douglas, The moral responsibilities of scientists (tensions between autonomy and responsibility), Am. Philos. Q., 2003, 40, 59-68.
68. C. Mitcham, Co-responsibility for research integrity, Sci. Eng. Ethics, 2003, 9, 273-290.
69. Hands Off Mother Earth (HOME), SPICE Opposition Letter, 2011; www.handsoffmotherearth.org/hose-experiment/spice-opposition-letter (last accessed 7/11/2013).
70. P. Davidson, H. Hunt and C. Burgoyne, Atmospheric delivery system, Br. Pat. Application, GB 2476518, 2011; worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC = GB&NR = 2476518 (last accessed 7/11/2013).
71. S. O. Funtowicz and J. R. Ravetz, Three types of risk assessment and the emergence of post normal science, In Social Theories of Risk, ed. S. Krimsky and D. Golding, Praeger, New York, 1992, 251-273.
72. H. Nowotny, P. Scott and M. Gibbons, Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty, Polity, Cambridge, 2001, 166-178.
73. http://www.climate2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5-SPM-FINAL.pdf (last accessed 7/2/14).