cbd-ts-66-en

Part I: Impacts of Climate-related Geoengineering on Biological Diversity
It is important that research on geoengineering does not itself contribute to that “lock in”. To minimize that risk,
it is essential that any such research is fully transparent, open-minded and objective (i.e., without prejudice to the
desirability or otherwise of geoengineering implementation), and preferably carried out on an international basis.
6.3.3 Governance and legal considerations
Issues related to geoengineering governance and regulation have gained increased prominence in the
literature.435, 436, 437 It should be noted that the challenges for regulation and governance of geoengineering include
the variety of evolving technologies as well as their different stages of development—ranging from theory to
modelling, to sub-scale field testing, and large scale deployment.438 Governance structures also need to provide
different functions ranging from ensuring transparency, participation, containing risks, the coordination of science,
bridging the science-policy divide, and create structures to secure funding.439
These issues, along with precautionary principle/approach and human rights approaches, are discussed in more
detail in the study on the regulatory framework of climate-related geoengineering relevant to the Convention on
Biological Diversity presented in Part II of this volume, and are therefore not explored in detail here.
6.3.4 Societal distribution considerations
The large-scale application of geoengineering would raise a number of questions regarding the distribution of
resources and impacts within and amongst societies and across time. First, access to natural resources is needed for
several geoengineering techniques. Competition for limited resources can be expected to increase if geoengineering
technologies emerge as a competing activity for land or water use. For example, possible competition for land
as a result of land based albedo changes, or land based CDR will reduce land available for other uses such as the
production of food crops, medicinal plants or the exploitation of non-timber forest products. These competing
demands for land use can increase social tensions unless addressed by national and local institutions.440 In addition,
changes in land use may impact local communities and indigenous people’s cultural and spiritual values of natural
areas, sacred groves and water shades.441
These issues could also be relevant in the marine environment where experimentation or deployment of
geoengineering proposals such as ocean fertilization could impact traditional marine resource use.442, 443 The use
of the deep water as reservoirs for storage of CO2 or biomass, as well as for ocean fertilization, would also use
ocean space. To the extent that most of these activities would happen on the high seas, they are unlikely to raise
significant distributional issues as a social consideration.
Enhanced weathering on land however will have clear local impacts as it requires large mining areas and associated
transport infrastructure. In addition, the mineral resources required will only be available in certain locations,
therefore reducing the opportunity for choosing between alternative sites. Based on historical experience, large
mining activities could have serious social impacts. In addition, land space is needed for weathering to happen.
Second, the distribution of impacts of geoengineering is not likely to be even or uniform as are the impacts of
climate change itself. Regarding impacts on climate, this appears to be mainly an issue arising from SRM. Regarding
435 Macnaghten & Owen (2011).
436 Reynolds (2011).
437 Solar Radiation Management Governance Initiative (2011).
438 Blackstock et al. (2011).
439 Bodansky (2011).
440 Trumper et al. (2009).
441 United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF) (2011).
442 Glibert (2008).
443 IMO (2007).
74