UCLA

Abstract: In the face of rapid global heating, ideas of solar geoengineering are receiving increased attention. Yet the governance of such risky emerging technologies is poorly explored. Here I examine how the risks involved in solar geoengineering might be assessed in the context of climate risks in two different models of risk management: the technocratic, and the securitized. I show that neither model alone provides a sufficient foundation for a meaningful ‘risk-risk’ assessment, and suggest a need for better defined, yet broad scope, symmetric assessments using worst-case as well as idealised scenarios, taking into account risks in research and development as well as deployment, and considering the social distribution of risks. I conclude that effective anticipatory and ethical risk assessment may usefully supplement, but cannot replace democratic political judgements on responses to climate change.