More international dialogue needed
for emerging climate intervention research

Laxenburg, Austria – 29 January 2010. Interest in the potential use of geoengineering techniques to help stabilize our changing climate continues to mount within the scientific and policy communities (see Nature vol 463, p. 426 and Science vol 327 p.530). However, concern remains that expanding national level geoengineering research could exacerbate the international tensions already plaguing climate negotiations.

In today’s issue of Science (vol 327, p. 527) Dr. Jason Blackstock from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis and Centre for International Governance Innovation (Canada), along with co-author Jane Long from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (USA), argues that expanding national level geoengineering research should be tempered until a broad international process is established that ensures all countries—and particularly vulnerable developing countries—have a voice on if, and how, controversial aspects of such research can be safely conducted. The article focuses on one geoengineering approach, solar radiation management (SRM), for which they argue that any field-testing that could have climatic impacts across national boundaries—such as some of the larger tests described in this week’s issue of Nature—should first require a broad international dialogue.

According to Dr. Blackstock the concerns about geoengineering (the intentional, large-scale alteration of the climate system) relate to both scientific uncertainty and the political tensions over perceived ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ from the development and control of such technologies. Most importantly, if large-scale field-tests were conducted without international approval, it could spark international tensions over (real or perceived) transboundary impacts.

“The potential consequences of a large SRM field-test are not well understood, and the environmental impacts are unlikely to be contained within the borders of a single country. As such, there must be some form of internationally legitimate scientific standards for defining what constitutes negligible or acceptable risks for any SRM field-tests,” says Blackstock.
                                            
“Questions of if, when, and where climate impacts testing should begin, or how SRM technologies should be managed, require a broadly accessible, transparent, and international political process. Importantly, vulnerable developing countries, who to date have been absent from SRM discussions must be involved, and all stakeholders need to consider whether existing frameworks can facilitate this process, or whether new treaties, organizations, and so on are required.”

download black & white figure

The various stages, status and international political challenges for SRM research as suggested by Dr. Blackstock are outlined in the table.

The article stresses the need for the establishment of international norms and best practices for geongineering research, stating that national research programs and individual scientists must forswear climatic impacts testing and restrict subscale field-testing until approved by a legitimate international process. All SRM research should be in the public domain and be integrated into any subsequent international research framework. Programs should include international collaboration, communicate with developing nations, and prioritize research that has global versus national benefits.

“If countries currently beginning SRM research voluntarily commit themselves to these principles, they can at least prevent new tensions from being heaped onto the already strained global climate agenda, and help preserve options for future international cooperation,” he concludes.

Science Policy Forum: The Politics of Geoengineering Jason J. Blackstock and Jane C. S. Long vol 327, p. 527.

Contact information:
Dr. Jason Blackstock, IIASA
Tel: +1 617 401 8232
E-mail: jjb@iiasa.ac.at

Leane Regan, IIASA
Tel: +43 2236 807 316 or +43 664 443 0368
E-mail: regan@iiasa.ac.at

About IIASA:
IIASA is an independent, interdisciplinary research institution, which specializes in natural and social scientific research methods and models valued by policy makers and the scientific community worldwide. IIASA is an international institution, with member organizations in 17 countries.

Responsible for this page: Communications
Last updated: 02 Jul 2010