Deliberate large-scale interventions in the Earth’s climate system, known collectively as climate ‘geoengineering’, have been proposed in order to moderate anthropogenic climate change. A host of normative rationales for geoengineering has led to a growing number of appraisals to evaluate the different proposals and provide decision support. This thesis critically reviews current appraisals of geoengineering before developing and executing its own appraisal methodology in response to their limitations. These limitations concern: (1) the appraisal of geoengineering proposals in ‘contextual isolation’ of alternative options for tackling climate change; (2) inadequate methodological responses to the ‘post-normal’ scientific context in which climate change and geoengineering resides; and (3) a premature ‘closing down’ upon particular geoengineering proposals, principally stratospheric aerosol injection, through the exertion of power via framings. This thesis exhibits the findings of an ‘upstream’ participatory appraisal of geoengineering called Deliberative Mapping; an innovative analytic-deliberative methodology designed to ‘open up’ appraisal inputs and outputs to a broader diversity of framings, knowledges and future pathways. A diversity of international experts and stakeholders from across academia, civil society, industry and government, and of sociodemographically representative citizens from Norfolk (UK), were engaged using a combination of analytic Multi-Criteria Mapping specialist interviews and deliberative citizens’ panels, as well as a joint specialists-citizens workshop. The results present a radically different view to other appraisals of geoengineering, where: (1) geoengineering proposals are most often outperformed by mitigation options, with stratospheric aerosol injection ranking particularly poorly; (2) a greater diversity of perspectives and assessment criteria spanning the natural, applied and social sciences reveals considerable uncertainties in all areas of research and decision making; and (3) four propositions for governance emerge that advance sociotechnical foresight, technology control and public consent, the anticipation and alleviation of impacts, a demonstration of robustness, and ultimately, the responsible innovation of geoengineering.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:bl.uk/oai:ethos.bl.uk:614522 |
| Date | January 2013 |
| Creators | Bellamy, Rob |
| Publisher | University of East Anglia |
| Source Sets | Ethos UK |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
| Source | https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/48787/ |
Page generated in 0.0016 seconds