Some Early Ethics of Geoengineering the Climate: A Commentary on the Values of the Royal Society Report
The Royal Society's landmark report on geoengineering is predicated on a particular account of the context and rationale for intentional manipulation of the climate system, and this ethical framework probably explains many of the Society's conclusions. Critical reflection on the report's values is useful for understanding disagreements within and about geoengineering policy, and also for identifying questions for early ethical analysis. Topics discussed include the moral hazard argument, governance, the ethical status of geoengineering under different rationales, the implications of understanding geoengineering as a consequence of wider moral failure, and ethical resistance to invasive interventions in environmental systems.
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Eric Neumayer, 2007. "A missed opportunity: the Stern review on climate change fails to tackle the issue of non-substitutable loss of natural capital," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3059, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- Benjamin Hale & W.P. Grundy, 2009. "Remediation and Respect: Do Remediation Technologies Alter Our Responsibility?," Environmental Values, White Horse Press, vol. 18(4), pages 397-415, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:env:journl:ev20:ev2009. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Andrew Johnson)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.