Evoking equity as a rationale for solar geoengineering research? Scrutinizing emerging expert visions of equity

Jane A. Flegal, A. Gupta

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper examines how notions of equity are being evoked by expert advocates of more research into solar geoengineering. We trace how specific understandings of equity figure centrally—although not always explicitly—in these expert visions. We find that understandings of equity in such “vanguard visions” are narrowly conceived as epistemic challenges, answerable by (more) scientific analysis. Major concerns about equity are treated as empirical matters, requiring scientific assessment of feasibility, risks, or “win–win” distributive outcomes and optimizations, with concurrent calls to delimit risk or reduce scientific uncertainties. We argue that such epistemic framings sidestep, inter alia, the inequality in resources available to diverse non-experts—including the “vulnerable” evoked in expert visions—to project their own equity perspectives onto imagined technological pathways of the future. These may include concerns relating to moral or historical responsibility and/or lack of agency in shaping the directions of innovation. We conclude that the performative power and political implications of specific expert visions of equity, evoked as a rationale to undertake solar geoengineering research, require continued scrutiny.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)45-61
JournalInternational Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics
Volume18
Issue number1
Early online date19 Sep 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2018

Fingerprint

equity
expert
Geoengineering
Rationale
Equity
uncertainty
innovation
responsibility
lack
resources

Keywords

  • climate governance
  • equity
  • solar geoengineering
  • climate models
  • speculative ethics
  • climate engineering
  • United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
  • Paris agreement

Cite this

@article{315c47dbe6194d1c934b38c1c37f9833,
title = "Evoking equity as a rationale for solar geoengineering research? Scrutinizing emerging expert visions of equity",
abstract = "This paper examines how notions of equity are being evoked by expert advocates of more research into solar geoengineering. We trace how specific understandings of equity figure centrally—although not always explicitly—in these expert visions. We find that understandings of equity in such “vanguard visions” are narrowly conceived as epistemic challenges, answerable by (more) scientific analysis. Major concerns about equity are treated as empirical matters, requiring scientific assessment of feasibility, risks, or “win–win” distributive outcomes and optimizations, with concurrent calls to delimit risk or reduce scientific uncertainties. We argue that such epistemic framings sidestep, inter alia, the inequality in resources available to diverse non-experts—including the “vulnerable” evoked in expert visions—to project their own equity perspectives onto imagined technological pathways of the future. These may include concerns relating to moral or historical responsibility and/or lack of agency in shaping the directions of innovation. We conclude that the performative power and political implications of specific expert visions of equity, evoked as a rationale to undertake solar geoengineering research, require continued scrutiny.",
keywords = "climate governance, equity, solar geoengineering, climate models, speculative ethics, climate engineering, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Paris agreement",
author = "Flegal, {Jane A.} and A. Gupta",
year = "2018",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1007/s10784-017-9377-6",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
pages = "45--61",
journal = "International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics",
issn = "1567-9764",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "1",

}

Evoking equity as a rationale for solar geoengineering research? Scrutinizing emerging expert visions of equity. / Flegal, Jane A.; Gupta, A.

In: International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Vol. 18, No. 1, 02.2018, p. 45-61.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evoking equity as a rationale for solar geoengineering research? Scrutinizing emerging expert visions of equity

AU - Flegal, Jane A.

AU - Gupta, A.

PY - 2018/2

Y1 - 2018/2

N2 - This paper examines how notions of equity are being evoked by expert advocates of more research into solar geoengineering. We trace how specific understandings of equity figure centrally—although not always explicitly—in these expert visions. We find that understandings of equity in such “vanguard visions” are narrowly conceived as epistemic challenges, answerable by (more) scientific analysis. Major concerns about equity are treated as empirical matters, requiring scientific assessment of feasibility, risks, or “win–win” distributive outcomes and optimizations, with concurrent calls to delimit risk or reduce scientific uncertainties. We argue that such epistemic framings sidestep, inter alia, the inequality in resources available to diverse non-experts—including the “vulnerable” evoked in expert visions—to project their own equity perspectives onto imagined technological pathways of the future. These may include concerns relating to moral or historical responsibility and/or lack of agency in shaping the directions of innovation. We conclude that the performative power and political implications of specific expert visions of equity, evoked as a rationale to undertake solar geoengineering research, require continued scrutiny.

AB - This paper examines how notions of equity are being evoked by expert advocates of more research into solar geoengineering. We trace how specific understandings of equity figure centrally—although not always explicitly—in these expert visions. We find that understandings of equity in such “vanguard visions” are narrowly conceived as epistemic challenges, answerable by (more) scientific analysis. Major concerns about equity are treated as empirical matters, requiring scientific assessment of feasibility, risks, or “win–win” distributive outcomes and optimizations, with concurrent calls to delimit risk or reduce scientific uncertainties. We argue that such epistemic framings sidestep, inter alia, the inequality in resources available to diverse non-experts—including the “vulnerable” evoked in expert visions—to project their own equity perspectives onto imagined technological pathways of the future. These may include concerns relating to moral or historical responsibility and/or lack of agency in shaping the directions of innovation. We conclude that the performative power and political implications of specific expert visions of equity, evoked as a rationale to undertake solar geoengineering research, require continued scrutiny.

KW - climate governance

KW - equity

KW - solar geoengineering

KW - climate models

KW - speculative ethics

KW - climate engineering

KW - United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

KW - Paris agreement

U2 - 10.1007/s10784-017-9377-6

DO - 10.1007/s10784-017-9377-6

M3 - Article

VL - 18

SP - 45

EP - 61

JO - International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics

JF - International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics

SN - 1567-9764

IS - 1

ER -