Current Science

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Perspectives from India on Geoengineering


Affiliations
1 Observer Research Foundation, 20, Rouse Avenue Institutional Area, New Delhi - 110 002, India
 

Geo-engineering technologies for deliberate and large-scale manipulation of the Earth’s climate system are receiving serious scientific and political interest in the discourse on policy instruments for limiting temperature rise to 1.5°C. While the debate on the scientific and technical feasibility of a range of geo-engineering technologies rages on, there is an urgent need for analysis of the complex ethical, social and governance issues related to research, experimentation and eventual deployment of these technologies. Our perception survey of Indian policy makers dealing with climate change has identified a number of governance concerns related to geoengineering technologies. Possible unintended consequences and 'side effects' of these technologies raises concerns of differential impacts in the vulnerable global south. Large-scale deployment of BECCS could have significant impact on food security, water resources and biodiversity. Above all, Indian policy makers are concerned about the prospect of unilateral action on geoengineering by developed nations. We examine in this article potential governance arrangements for geo-engineering technologies.

Keywords

Climate Change, Geoenginering, Governance, Perspective.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • UNFCCC V, Adoption of the Paris Agreement, I: Proposal by the President (Draft Decision), United Nations Office, Geneva, Switzerland, 2015.

  • Anderson, K. and Peters, G., The trouble with negative emissions. Science, 2016, 354, 182–183.

  • Peters, G., Should climate policy aim to avoid 2°C or to exceed 2°C? Centre for International Climate Research (CICERO), 2017; http://www.cicero.uio.no/no/posts/klima/should-climate-policyaimtoavoid-2c-or-to-exceed-2c (accessed on 4 May 2017).

  • Geden, O. and Schäfer, S., Negative emissions: a challenge for climate policy, 2016, 1–4; https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/bitstream/ handle/document/49822/ssoar-2016-geden_et_al-Negative_emissions_ a_challenge_for.pdf?sequence=1

  • IPCC, Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R. K. and Meyer, L. A., 2014; doi:10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

  • The Royal Society, Geoengineering the Climate, 2009.

  • Humphreys, D., Smoke and mirrors: some reflections on the science and politics of geoengineering. J. Environ. Dev., 2011, 20, 99–120.

  • Minx, J. C., Lamb, W. F., Callaghan, M. W., Bornmann, L. and Fuss, S., Fast growing research on negative emissions. Environ. Res. Lett., 2017, 12(3), 035007.

  • Taylor, L. L. et al., Enhanced weathering strategies for stabilizing climate and averting ocean acidification. Nature Climate Change, 2011, 6, 402–406.

  • Latham, J. et al., Marine cloud brightening. Philos. Trans. R. Soc., London, Ser. A, 2012, 370, 4217–4262.

  • Bala, G. et al., Albedo enhancement of marine clouds to counteract global warming: impacts on the hydrological cycle. Climate Dyn., 2011, 37, 915–931.

  • Crutzen, P. J., Albedo enhancement by stratospheric sulfur injections: A contribution to resolve a policy dilemma? Climatic Change, 2006, 77, 211–219.

  • Parker, A. and Geden, O., No fudging on geoengineering. Nature Geoscience, 2016, 9(12), 859.

  • Neslen, A., US scientists launch world’s biggest solar geoengineering study. The Guardian, 2017; https://www.theguardian.com/ environment/2017/mar/24/us-scientists-launchworlds-biggest-solargeoengineeringstudy (accessed on 1 June 2017).

  • Visschers, V. H. M., Shi, J., Siegrist, M. and Arvai, J., Beliefs and values explain international differences in perception of solar radiation management: insights from a cross-country survey. Climate Change, 2017, 142(3–4), 531–544; doi:10.1007/s10584-017-1970-8

  • Michaelowa, K. and Michaelowa, A., India as an emerging power in international climate negotiations. Climate Policy, 2012, 12, 575–590.

  • Bala, G. and Gupta, A., Geoengineering and India. Curr. Sci., 2017, 113(3), 376–377.

  • Modak, A. and Bala, G., Sensitivity of simulated climate to latitudinal distribution of solar insolation reduction in solar radiation management. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 2014, 14, 7769–7779.

  • Kalidindi, S., Bala, G., Modak, A. and Caldeira, K., Modeling of solar radiation management: a comparison of simulations using reduced solar constant and stratospheric sulphate aerosols. Climate Dyn., 2015, 44, 2909–2925.

  • Ghosh, S., Sharma, A., Arora, S. and Desouza, G., A geoengineering approach toward tackling tropical cyclones over the Bay of Bengal. Atmos. Sci. Lett., 2016, 17, 208–215.

  • Spradley, J. P., The Ethnographic Interview, Waveland Press, 2016; doi:10.1300/J004v08n02_05

  • Kuzel, A. J., In Doing Qualitative Research (eds Crabtree, B. F. and Miller, W. L.), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, US, 1992, pp. 31–44.

  • Huttunen, S. and Hildén, M., Framing the controversial: geoengineering in academic literature. Sci. Commun., 2013, 36, 3–29.

  • Keith, D. W., Geoengineering the climate: history and prospect. Annu. Rev. Energy Environ., 2000, 25, 245–284.

  • Corner, A. and Pidgeon, N., Geoengineering the climate – the social and ethical implications. Environ. Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev., 2010, 52, 24–37.

  • Rayner, S. et al., The Oxford Principles. Climate Change, 2013, 121(3), 499–512.

  • Bala, G., Duffy, P. B. and Taylor, K. E., Impact of geoengineering schemes on the global hydrological cycle. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 2008, 105, 7664–7669.

  • Karlsson, S., Srebotnjak, T. and Gonzales, P., Understanding the North–South knowledge divide and its implications for policy: a quantitative analysis of the generation of scientific knowledge in the environmental sciences. Environ. Sci. Policy, 2007, 10, 668–684.

  • Kandlikar, M. and Sagar, A., Climate change research and analysis in India: an integrated assessment of a South–North divide. Global Environ. Change, 1999, 9, 119–138.

  • Blicharska, M. et al., Steps to overcome the North-South divide in research relevant to climate change policy and practice. Nature Climate Change, 2017, 7, 21–27.

  • Flegal, J. A. and Gupta, A., Evoking equity as a rationale for solar geoengineering research? Scrutinizing emerging expert visions of equity. Int. Environ. Agreements: Politics, Law Econ., 2018, 18(1), 45–61; doi:10.1007/s10784-017-9377-6

  • Jasanoff, S., Technologies of humility: citizen participation in governing science. Minerva, 2003, 41, 223–244.

  • Agarwal, A. and Narain, S., Global warming in an unequal world: A case of environmental colonialism. In Global Warming in an Unequal World: A Case of Environmental Colonialism, Centre for Science and Environment, 1991.

  • Reynolds, J. L., Contreras, J. L. and Sarnoff, J. D., Intellectual property policies for solar geoengineering. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev.: Climate Change, 2018; doi:10.1002/wcc.512

  • Ghosh, A., Environmental Institutions, International Research Programmes, and Lessons for Geoengineering Research. Geoengineering Our Climate Working Paper, 2014; https:// geoengineeringourclimate.com/2014/02/25/environmental-institutionsinternationalresearch-programmes-and-lessons-for-geoengineeringresearchworking-paper

  • Sarewitz, D., Not by experts alone. Nature, 2010, 466, 688.

  • Collingridge, D., The Social Control of Technology, Frances Pinter, 1982.

  • Irwin, A., In The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (eds Hackett, E. J. et al.), MIT Press, 2008, No. 3.

  • Guston, D. H., Understanding ‘anticipatory governance’. Soc. Stud. Sci., 2014, 44, 218–242.

  • Voβ, J. P., Bauknecht, D. and Kemp, R., Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2006.


Abstract Views: 463

PDF Views: 120




  • Perspectives from India on Geoengineering

Abstract Views: 463  |  PDF Views: 120

Authors

Vikram Mathur
Observer Research Foundation, 20, Rouse Avenue Institutional Area, New Delhi - 110 002, India
Aparna Roy
Observer Research Foundation, 20, Rouse Avenue Institutional Area, New Delhi - 110 002, India

Abstract


Geo-engineering technologies for deliberate and large-scale manipulation of the Earth’s climate system are receiving serious scientific and political interest in the discourse on policy instruments for limiting temperature rise to 1.5°C. While the debate on the scientific and technical feasibility of a range of geo-engineering technologies rages on, there is an urgent need for analysis of the complex ethical, social and governance issues related to research, experimentation and eventual deployment of these technologies. Our perception survey of Indian policy makers dealing with climate change has identified a number of governance concerns related to geoengineering technologies. Possible unintended consequences and 'side effects' of these technologies raises concerns of differential impacts in the vulnerable global south. Large-scale deployment of BECCS could have significant impact on food security, water resources and biodiversity. Above all, Indian policy makers are concerned about the prospect of unilateral action on geoengineering by developed nations. We examine in this article potential governance arrangements for geo-engineering technologies.

Keywords


Climate Change, Geoenginering, Governance, Perspective.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.18520/cs%2Fv116%2Fi1%2F40-46