How geoengineering scientists perceive their role in climate security politics – from concern and unease to strategic positioning

References

• Berling, T. V., & Bueger, C. (2015). Security Expertise: Practice, Power, Responsibility. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Berling, T. V., & Bueger, C. (2017). Expertise in the age of post-factual politics: An outline of reflexive strategies. Geoforum, 84, 332–341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blackstock, J. J., & Long, J. C. S. (2010, January 29). The politics of geoengineering. Science, 327(5965), 527.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bruner, T. (2017). “Sinking islands” and the UNSC: Five modalities of mobilising science. Geoforum, 84, 342–353.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Büger, C., & Villumsen, T. (2007). Beyond the gap: Relevance, fields of practice and the securitizing consequences of (democratic peace) research. Journal of International Relations and Development, 10(4).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buzan, B., Wæver, O., & de Wilde, J. (1998). Security – A new framework for analysis. Boulder, London: Lynne Rinner Publishers Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Council of the European Union. (2009). Council conclusions on climate change and international security (CCIS) and progress report (pp. 2009). Brussels: Council of the European Union.
   Google Scholar
• Dalby, S. (2002). Environmental security. Minneapolis, USA: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dalby, S. (2017). Firepower: Geopolitical cultures in the anthropocene. Geopolitics, 1–25. doi:10.1080/14650045.2017.1344835
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dilling, L., & Lemos, M. C. (2011). Creating usable science: Opportunities and constraints for climate knowledge use and their implications for science policy. Global Environmental Change, 21(2), 680–689.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elbe, S. (2006). Should HIV/AIDS be securitized? The ethical dilemmas of linking HIV/AIDS and security. International Studies Quarterly, 50(1), 119–144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Filho, W. L. (2013). Climate change and disaster risk management. Germany: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
   Google Scholar
• Gieryn, T. F. (1983). Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review, 48(6), 781–795.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gulbrandsen, M., & Smeby, J.-C. (2005). Industry funding and university professors’ research performance. Research Policy, 34, 932–950.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heyward, C. (2013). Situating and abandoning geoengineering: A typology of five responses to dangerous climate change. Political Science and Politics, 46(1), 23–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horton, J. B., & Reynolds, J. L. (2016). The international politics of climate engineering: A review and prospectus for international relations. International Studies Review, 18(3), 438–461.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IPCC. (2014). Climate change 2014: Synthesis report. In R. K. Pachauri, & L. A. Meyer (Eds.), Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change core writing team (p. 151). Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S. (2005). Judgment under siege: The three-body problem of expert legitimacy. In S. Maasen & P. Weingart (Eds.), Democratization of expertise? Exploring novel forms of scientific advice in political decision-making (pp. 209–224). Dortrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S. (2010). A new climate for society. Theory, Culture & Society, 27(2–3), 233–253.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keith, D. (2013). A case for climate engineering. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Boston Review. Cambridge, Mass. London, England: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. USA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lefsrud, L. M., & Meyer, R. E. (2012). Science or science fiction? Professionals’ discursive construction of climate change. Organization Studies, 33(11), 1477–1506.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Link, M. P., Brzoska, M., Maas, A., Neuneck, G., & Scheffran, J. (2013, February). Possible implications of climate engineering for peace and security. In J. Scheffran, M. Brzoska, H.-G. Brauch, M.P. Link, and J. P. Schilling (eds), pp. 185–205. Climate change, Human Security and Violent Conflict. Challenges for Societal Stability. Meeting Summary. American Meterorological Society. Berlin, Germany: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Lundin, M., & Öberg, P. O. (2013). Expert knowledge use and deliberation in local policy making. Policy Sciences, 47(1), 25–49.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maas, A., & Scheffran, J. (2012). Climate conflicts 2.0? Climate engineering as a challenge for international peace and security. Sicherheit Und Frieden (S+F)/Security and Peace, 30(4), 193–200.
   Google Scholar
• Milkoreit, M., Moore, M.-L., Schoon, M., & Meek, C. L. (2015). Resilience scientists as change-makers—growing the middle ground between science and advocacy? Environmental Science & Policy, 53(Part B), 87–95.
   Google Scholar
• Naeem, S., Ingram, J. C., Varga, A., Agardy, T., Barten, P., Bennett, G., … Wunder, S. (2015). Get the science right when paying for nature’s services. Science, 347(6227), 1206–1207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oels, A. (2012). From ‘Securitization’ of climate change to ‘Climatization’ of the security field: Comparing three theoretical perspectives. Climate change, human security and violent conflict (pp. 185–205).
   Google Scholar
• Pasgaard, M., Dawson, N., Rasmussen, L. V., Enghoff, M., & Jensen, A. (2017b). The research and practice of integrating conservation and development: Self-reflections by researchers on methodologies, objectives and influence. Global Ecology and Conservation, 9, 50–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pasgaard, M., Ehammer, A., Van Hecken, G., & Strange, N. (2017a). Unfolding scientific expertise and security in the changing governance of ecosystem services. Geoforum, 84, 354–367.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robock, A. (2008). 20 reasons why geoengineering may be a bad idea: Carbon dioxide emissions are rising so fast that some scientists are seriously considering putting earth on life support as a last resort. But is this cure worse than the disease? Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 64(2), 14–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Royal Society. (2009). Geoengineering the climate: Science, governance and uncertainty. Retrieved from https://royalsociety.org/~/media/Royal_Society_Content/policy/publications/2009/8693.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Rychnovská, D., Pasgaard, M., & Berling, T. V. (2017). Science and security expertise: Authority, knowledge, subjectivity. Geoforum, 84, 327–331.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spencer, T. (2014). The short- and long-term challenges of climate change and security. European View, 13, 303–307.
   Google Scholar
• Trombetta, M. J. (2008). Environmental security and climate change: Analysing the discourse. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 21(4), 585–602.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UN. (2009). Climate change and its possible security implications - report of the secretary-general. United Nations (UN). General Assembly. Sixty-fourth session, Item 114 of the provisional agenda.
   Google Scholar
• UNFCCC. (2015). The paris agreement. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Retrieved from http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/paris_nov_2015/application/pdf/paris_agreement_english_.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Von Lucke, F., Wellmann, Z., & Diez, T. (2014). What’s at stake in securitising climate change? Towards a differentiated approach. Geopolitics, 19(4), 857–884.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wæver, O. (1997). Concepts of security. University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark: Department of Political Science.
   Google Scholar
• The White House. (2015). National security strategy. The White House. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2015_national_security_strategy.pdf
   Google Scholar