Sleepwalking into lock-in? Avoiding wrongs to future people in the governance of solar radiation management research

References

• Baatz, C., 2016. Can we have it both ways? On potential trade-offs between mitigation and solar radiation management. Environmental Values, 25 (1), 29–49. doi:10.3197/096327115X14497392134847
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrett, S., et al., 2014. Climate engineering reconsidered. Nature Climate Change, 4 (7), 527–529. doi:10.1038/nclimate2278
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baum, S.D., Maher, T.M., and Haqq-Misra, J., 2013. Double catastrophe: intermittent stratospheric geoengineering induced by societal collapse. Environment Systems & Decisions, 33 (1), 168–180. doi:10.1007/s10669-012-9429-y
   Google Scholar
• Bellamy, R., et al., 2012. A review of climate geoengineering appraisals. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 3 (6), 597–615.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cairns, R.C., 2014. Climate geoengineering: issues of path-dependence and socio-technical lock-in. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 5 (5), 649–661.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caney, S., 2014. Climate change, intergenerational equity and the social discount rate. Politics, Philosophy & Economics, 13 (4), 320–342. doi:10.1177/1470594X14542566
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CAT, 2016. Global temperatures – climate action tracker [online]. Available from: http://climateactiontracker.org/global.html.
   Google Scholar
• Cicerone, R.J., 2006. Geoengineering: encouraging research and overseeing implementation. Climatic Change, 77 (3–4), 221–226. doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9102-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corner, A., Pidgeon, N., and Parkhill, K., 2012. Perceptions of geoengineering: public attitudes, stakeholder perspectives, and the challenge of ?upstream? engagement. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 3 (5), 451–466.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crutzen, P.J., 2006. Albedo enhancement by stratospheric sulfur injections: a contribution to resolve a policy dilemma? Climatic Change, 77 (3–4), 211–220. doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9101-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elliott, K., 2010. Geoengineering and the precautionary principle. International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 24 (2), 237–253. doi:10.5840/ijap201024221
   Google Scholar
• Foxon, T.J., 2007. Technological lock-in and the role of innovation. In: G. Atkinson, S. Dietz, and E. Neumayer, eds. Handbook of sustainable development: second edition. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 140–154.
   Google Scholar
• Fragniere, A. and Gardiner, S.M., 2016. Why geoengineering is not ‘Plan B’. In: C. Preston, ed. Climate Justice and Geoengineering: Ethics and Policy in the Atmospheric Anthropocene. London: Rowman and Littlefield International, 15–32.
   Google Scholar
• Friedrich, T., et al., 2016. Nonlinear climate sensitivity and its implications for future greenhouse warming. Science Advances, 2 (11), e1501923–e1501923. doi:10.1126/sciadv.1501923
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardiner, S.M., 2006. A core precautionary principle*. Journal of Political Philosophy, 14 (1), 33–60. doi:10.1111/jopp.2006.14.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardiner, S.M., 2010. Is ‘arming the future’ with geoengineering really the lesser evil? Some doubts about the ethics of intentionally manipulating the climate system. In: S.M. Gardiner, S. Caney, D. Jamieson, and H. Shue, eds. Climate ethics: essential readings. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 284–314.
   Google Scholar
• Gardiner, S.M., 2011. A perfect moral storm : the ethical tragedy of climate change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gardiner, S.M., 2014. A call for a global constitutional convention focused on future generations. Ethics & International Affairs, 28 (3), 299–315. doi:10.1017/S0892679414000379
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geoengineering Research Governance Project (GRGP) 2017. Oxford workshop on a code of conduct for responsible geoengineering research – Anna-Maria Hubert | FCEA [online]. Available from: http://ceassessment.org/geoengineering-research-governance-project-grgp-oxford-workshop-on-a-code-of-conduct-for-responsible-geoengineering-research-anna-maria-hubert/ [Accessed 10 July 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Goes, M., Tuana, N., and Keller, K., 2011. The economics (or lack thereof) of aerosol geoengineering. Climatic Change, 109 (3–4), 719–744. doi:10.1007/s10584-010-9961-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldberg, S., 2016. UN climate science chief: it’s not too late to avoid dangerous temperature rise | environment | The Guardian [online]. The Guardian. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/11/un-climate-change-hoesung-lee-global-warming-interview [Accessed 5 Jul 2017].
   Google Scholar
• González-Ricoy, I. and Gosseries, A., eds., 2016. Institutions for future generations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gosseries, A. and Meyer, L.H., 2009. Intergenerational justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hale, B., 2012. The world that would have been: moral hazard arguments against geoengineering. In: C. Preston, ed. Engineering the climate: the ethics of solar radiation management. Lanham: Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• Hamilton, C., 2013. Earthmasters: the dawn of the age of climate engineering. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hartzell-Nichols, L., 2012. Precaution and solar radiation management. Ethics, Policy & Environment, 15 (2), 158–171. doi:10.1080/21550085.2012.685561
   Google Scholar
• Hartzell-Nichols, L., 2017. A climate of risk precautionary principles, catastrophes, and climate change. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hauer, M.E., Evans, J.M., and Mishra, D.R., 2016. Millions projected to be at risk from sea-level rise in the continental United States. Nature Climate Change, 6 (7), 691–695. doi:10.1038/nclimate2961
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heyward, C., 2015. Is there anything new under the sun? In: A. Maltais and C. Mckinnon, eds. The ethics of climate governance. London: Rowman and Littlefield, 133–154.
   Google Scholar
• Horton, J. and Keith, D., 2016. Solar geoengineering and obligations to the global poor. In: C. Preston, ed. Climate justice and geoengineering: ethics and policy in the atmospheric Anthropocene. London: Rowman and Littlefield, 79–92.
   Google Scholar
• Hubert, A.-M., Kruger, T., and Rayner, S., 2016. Geoengineering: code of conduct for geoengineering. Nature, 537 (7621), 488–489. doi:10.1038/537488a
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jamieson, D., 1996. Ethics and intentional climate change. Climatic Change, 33 (3), 323–336. doi:10.1007/BF00142580
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jamieson, D., 2014. Reason in a dark time. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, A., et al., 2013. The impact of abrupt suspension of solar radiation management (termination effect) in experiment G2 of the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP). Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 118 (17), 9743–9752.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahn, P.H., 2011. Technological nature : adaptation and the future of human life. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J.L., and Thaler, R.H., 1991. Anomalies: the endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5, 193–206. doi:10.1257/jep.5.1.193
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keith, D.W., 2013. A case for climate engineering. Boston: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Keith, D.W. and Irvine, P.J., 2016. Solar geoengineering could substantially reduce climate risks – a research hypothesis for the next decade. Earth’s Future, 4 (11), 549–559. doi:10.1002/2016EF000465
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keith, D.W. and MacMartin, D.G., 2015. A temporary, moderate and responsive scenario for solar geoengineering. Nature Climate Change, 5 (3), 201–206. doi:10.1038/nclimate2493
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keller, D.P., Feng, E.Y., and Oschlies, A., 2014. Potential climate engineering effectiveness and side effects during a high carbon dioxide-emission scenario. Nature Communications, 5, doi:10.1038/ncomms4304
   Google Scholar
• Klein, N., 2014. This changes everything. London: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Larkin, P., 1974. The old fools. In: P. Larkin, ed. High windows. Faber and Faber: London, 13–14.
   Google Scholar
• Lin, A.C., 2015. The missing pieces of geoengineering research governance. Minnesota Law Review, 100, 2509–2576.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacMartin, D.G., Caldeira, K., and Keith, D.W., 2014. Solar geoengineering to limit the rate of temperature change. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 372, 20140134. doi:10.1098/rsta.2014.0134
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKinnon, C., 2009. Runaway climate change: a justice-based case for precautions. Journal of Social Philosophy, 40 (2), 187–203. doi:10.1111/josp.2009.40.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKinnon, C., 2012. Climate change and future justice : precaution, compensation, and triage. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• McKinnon, C., 2014. Climate change: against despair. Ethics and the Environment, 19, 1. doi:10.2979/ethicsenviro.19.1.31
   Google Scholar
• McKinnon, C., 2017. Endangering humanity: an international crime? Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 47 (2–3), 395–415. doi:10.1080/00455091.2017.1280381
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mora, C., et al., 2017. Global risk of deadly heat. Nature Climate Change, 7 (7), 501–506. doi:10.1038/nclimate3322
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrow, D., 2017. International Governance of Climate Engineering: A Survey of Reports on Climate Engineering, 2009-2015. FCEA Working Paper Series, 1 June. Washington, DC. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2982392 .
   Google Scholar
• Morrow, D.R., 2014. Ethical aspects of the mitigation obstruction argument against climate engineering research Author for correspondence. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 372, 1–14. doi:10.1098/rsta.2014.0062
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrow, D.R., Kopp, R.E., and Oppenheimer, M., 2013. Political legitimacy in decisions about experiments in solar radiation management. In: W.C.G. Burns and A. Strauss, eds. Climate change geoengineering: philosophical perspectives, legal issues, and governance frameworks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 146–167.
   Google Scholar
• Nuccitelli, D., 2016. Scientists debate experimenting with climate hacking to prevent catastrophe. The Guardian, 1 June.
   Google Scholar
• Parson, E.A., et al., 2013. Science and regulation. End the deadlock on governance of geoengineering research. Science (New York, N.Y.)., 339, 1278–1279. doi:10.1126/science.1232527
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preston, C.J., 2012. Solar radiation management and vulnerable populations. In: C.J. Preston, ed. Engineering the climate: the ethics of solar radiation management. Lanham: Lexington Books, 77–94.
   Google Scholar
• Rayner, S., et al., 2013. The Oxford Principles. Climatic Change, 121 (3), 499–512. doi:10.1007/s10584-012-0675-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynolds, J. and Fleurke, F., 2013. Climate engineering research: a precautionary response to climate change? Carbon & Climate Law Review, 7 (January), 101–107. doi:10.21552/CCLR/2013/2/251
   Google Scholar
• Reynolds, J.L., Parker, A., and Irvine, P., 2016. Five solar geoengineering tropes that have outstayed their welcome. Earth’s Future, 4 (12), 562–568. doi:10.1002/2016EF000416
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robock, A., 2008. 20 reasons why geoengineering may be a bad idea. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 64 (2), 14–59. doi:10.1080/00963402.2008.11461140
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogelj, J., et al., 2016. Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2°C. Nature, 534 (7609), 631–639. doi:10.1038/nature18307
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogelj, J., et al., 2015. Energy system transformations for limiting end-of-century warming to below 1.5°C. Nature Climate Change, 5 (6), 519–527. doi:10.1038/nclimate2572
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Royal Society, 2009. Geoengineering the climate: science, governance and uncertainty. RS Policy documents 10/09. London: The Royal Society.
   Google Scholar
• Shue, H., 1996. Basic rights: subsistence, affluence and US foreign policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schleussner, C.-F., et al., 2016. Science and policy characteristics of the Paris Agreement temperature goal. Nature Climate Change, 6 (9), 827–835. doi:10.1038/nclimate3096
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shue, H., 2010. Deadly delays, saving opportunities: creating a more dangerous world? In: S.M. Gardiner, S. Caney, D. Jamieson, and H. Shue, eds. Climate ethics: essential readings. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 146–162.
   Google Scholar
• Shue, H., 2015. Uncertainty as the reason for action: last opportunity and future climate disaster. Global Justice: theory Practice Rhetoric, 8 (2), 86–103.
   Google Scholar
• Steel, D., 2014. Philosophy and the precautionary principle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stirling, A., 2008. Science, precaution, and the politics of technological risk: converging implications in evolutionary and social scientific perspectives. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1128, 95–110. doi:10.1196/nyas.2008.1128.issue-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stirling, A., et al., 2008. “ Opening Up” and “Closing Down”: power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 33 (2), 262–294. doi:10.1177/0162243907311265
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sunstein, C.R., 2005. Laws of fear : beyond the precautionary principle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sunstein, C.R., 2007. The catastrophic harm precautionary principle. Issues in Legal Scholarship, 6, 3. doi:10.2202/1539-8323.1091
   Google Scholar
• Svoboda, T., et al., 2011. Sulfate aerosol geoengineering: the question of justice. Public Affairs Quarterly, 25 (3), 157–180.
   Google Scholar
• Tan, I., Storelvmo, T., and Zelinka, M.D., 2016. Observational constraints on mixed-phase clouds imply higher climate sensitivity. Science, 352, 224–227. doi:10.1126/science.aad5300
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tedsen, E. and Homann, G., 2013. Implementing the precautionary principle for climate engineering. Carbon & Climate Law Review, 7 (2), 90–100. doi:10.21552/CCLR/2013/2/250
   Google Scholar
• Wibeck, V., et al., 2017. Making sense of climate engineering: a focus group study of lay publics in four countries. Climatic Change, 145 (1–2), 1–14. doi:10.1007/s10584-017-2067-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, Z., et al., 2015. Review of geoengineering approaches to mitigating climate change. Journal of Cleaner Production, 103 (15), 898–907. September doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.076
   Google Scholar