Law Commons^™

Many scholars argue that the international regulation of solar climate engineering should be developed within those existing legal institutions that have (near-) universal participation--such as those of the UNFCCC or the CBD--and often toward binding rules. I believe that it would be counterproductive, at least for the foreseeable future. It is presently not a relatively productive endeavour to dwell on how states might collectively govern technologies which do not yet exist; whose forms, benefits, risks, costs, and reversibilities remain unknown; and under what circumstances and for what purposes they might be used are likewise still indefinite. We should conceptualize the …

Intentional interventions in global physical, chemical, and biological systems on a massive scale are receiving increasing attention in hopes of reducing the threat of anthropogenic climate change. Known as climate engineering, or geoengineering, research is moving forward, but regulation remains inadequate, due in part to significant regulatory challenges. This essay asserts that key to overcoming these regulatory challenges is distinguishing between the two primary forms of climate engineering, and between deployment and research. One of climate engineering's two primary forms, carbon dioxide removal, can largely be addressed through existing legal instruments. In the case of solar radiation management, the other …