IPCC Expert Meeting on Geoengineering

Annex 5: Breakout Group Reports
The BOG also suggested that AR5 authors might pose the question, ‘What are the governance gaps?’ When considering
governance, a distinction can be made between research and deployment. Some BOG participants believe that this
distinction requires defining ‘small scale’. The linkages to other processes might also be considered, for instance linking
SRM and mitigation, or linking SRM to adaptation and development. Equity in governance is another consideration.
<strong>IPCC</strong> AR5 authors might also consider noting the outcome of a workshop of the Solar Radiation Management Governance
Initiative (SRMGI), which articulated a need for an independent overseeing advisory board or committee which is
independent and not purely scientific (SRGMI, 2011). A final question discussed by the BOG which might be considered by
AR5 authors is whether there is something special about SRM that makes it ‘international’. This may depend on the
motivation of the actor. A need to assess technical impacts of SRM was also contemplated.
What are the most important aspects of these issues to evaluate (e.g., unintended side effects, risks and
uncertainties, indirect/social costs, legal and governance issues)?
This question was to some extent addressed in the discussion summarized above. In addition, BOG participants emphasized
that governance may not be ‘one size fits all’. This is particularly true as concerns scale—it is important to be able to
distinguish de minimis up to full-scale deployment. Another important distinction is between indirect and direct social cost,
and unintended side effects.
Can the most important aspects of these issues be supported by reference to the peer-reviewed literature,
ideally drawing from multiple lines of independent evidence? What is the available evidence and what are
relevant references?
It was acknowledged that only the broadest outlines of the aspects discussed above are supported by the literature. For this
reason, it might be relevant for AR5 authors to consider pertinent, analogous literature, and not just geoengineering
literature—e.g. ethics and governance, but also other physical sciences. Some issues raised are quite absent from the
literature—e.g., the metrics of SRM and climate change, as mentioned above.
References
Solar Radiation Management Governance Initiative, 2011: Solar radiation management: the governance of research.
Environmental Defense Fund, The Royal Society, TWAS.
<strong>IPCC</strong> <strong>Expert</strong> <strong>Meeting</strong> on Geoengineering - 84