%0 Journal Article %1 nicholson_solar_2018 %A Nicholson, Simon %A Jinnah, Sikina %A Gillespie, Alexander %D 2018 %J Climate Policy %K Climate change, climate engineering, geoengineering, global governance, management polycentric radiation solar %N 3 %P 322--334 %R 10.1080/14693062.2017.1400944 %T Solar radiation management: a proposal for immediate polycentric governance %U https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2017.1400944 %V 18 %X The stringency of the 1.5 degree goal under the Paris Agreement, coupled with the mismatch between that goal and domestic mitigation pledges, inevitably directs attention onto the potential future role of solar radiation management (SRM) technologies. Such technologies, however, remain controversial, and analysis of their environmental, social and ethical implications is at an early stage. In this context, this paper distils four key governance objectives and proposes three specific policy interventions for the near-term governance of SRM technologies. Specifically, we build from existing literature to argue that SRM governance must simultaneously: guard against the risks of uncontrolled SRM development; enable potentially valuable research; build legitimacy for research and any future policy through broad public engagement and ensure that SRM is only considered as one part of a broader mitigation agenda. We propose three interventions to work towards those objectives in the near term by: developing a transparency mechanism for research; creating a global forum for public engagement and including consideration of SRM in the global stocktake under the Paris Agreement. Finally, we argue that carrying out these interventions requires a shared or ‘polycentric’ SRM governance structure that can build on the site-specific capabilities and preferences of existing international institutions.Key policy insights Despite their highly controversial nature, large-scale technological interventions, such as solar radiation management (SRM), must be considered (albeit possibly rejected) for their potential contribution towards meeting the 1.5 degree target established under the Paris Agreement.Existing governance mechanisms for SRM need further development to ensure that unnecessary threats to social and/or natural systems are not incurred.There are at least three governance mechanisms that should be pursued immediately to protect against some of these potential threats, including: a transparency mechanism for SRM research, a global forum to facilitate public engagement and incorporating evaluation of SRM technologies into the global stocktake under the Paris Agreement.

@article{nicholson_solar_2018, abstract = {The stringency of the 1.5 degree goal under the Paris Agreement, coupled with the mismatch between that goal and domestic mitigation pledges, inevitably directs attention onto the potential future role of solar radiation management (SRM) technologies. Such technologies, however, remain controversial, and analysis of their environmental, social and ethical implications is at an early stage. In this context, this paper distils four key governance objectives and proposes three specific policy interventions for the near-term governance of SRM technologies. Specifically, we build from existing literature to argue that SRM governance must simultaneously: guard against the risks of uncontrolled SRM development; enable potentially valuable research; build legitimacy for research and any future policy through broad public engagement and ensure that SRM is only considered as one part of a broader mitigation agenda. We propose three interventions to work towards those objectives in the near term by: developing a transparency mechanism for research; creating a global forum for public engagement and including consideration of SRM in the global stocktake under the Paris Agreement. Finally, we argue that carrying out these interventions requires a shared or ‘polycentric’ SRM governance structure that can build on the site-specific capabilities and preferences of existing international institutions.Key policy insights Despite their highly controversial nature, large-scale technological interventions, such as solar radiation management (SRM), must be considered (albeit possibly rejected) for their potential contribution towards meeting the 1.5 degree target established under the Paris Agreement.Existing governance mechanisms for SRM need further development to ensure that unnecessary threats to social and/or natural systems are not incurred.There are at least three governance mechanisms that should be pursued immediately to protect against some of these potential threats, including: a transparency mechanism for SRM research, a global forum to facilitate public engagement and incorporating evaluation of SRM technologies into the global stocktake under the Paris Agreement.}, added-at = {2018-12-12T20:35:48.000+0100}, author = {Nicholson, Simon and Jinnah, Sikina and Gillespie, Alexander}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/251c91a8e3ed0915dc192186598be7e56/climatemorrow}, doi = {10.1080/14693062.2017.1400944}, file = {Full Text PDF:C\:\\Users\\dmorr\\Zotero\\storage\\7QSC4AB4\\Nicholson et al. - 2018 - Solar radiation management a proposal for immedia.pdf:application/pdf;Snapshot:C\:\\Users\\dmorr\\Zotero\\storage\\S52Z4R6L\\14693062.2017.html:text/html}, interhash = {2737a626da4ebc2ef5820523065da0fa}, intrahash = {51c91a8e3ed0915dc192186598be7e56}, issn = {1469-3062}, journal = {Climate Policy}, keywords = {Climate change, climate engineering, geoengineering, global governance, management polycentric radiation solar}, month = mar, number = 3, pages = {322--334}, shorttitle = {Solar radiation management}, timestamp = {2018-12-12T20:35:48.000+0100}, title = {Solar radiation management: a proposal for immediate polycentric governance}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2017.1400944}, urldate = {2018-09-04}, volume = 18, year = 2018 }