Catherine Redgwell
Professor of International Law
Faculty of Laws
University College London
c.redgwell@ucl.ac.uk
What is geoengineering?
• Includes all methods which involve deliberate large-
scale intervention in the working of the Earth’s
natural climate system
4
All options together
5
The Human Dimension
(Public Attitudes, Legal, Social, & Ethical Issues)
8
Key Questions:
• The big picture: Who decides whether, and when, to conduct
research and/or deploy? The ‘international community’ or those
State(s) actually engaged in the activity? If the former, is the climate
change regime the appropriate embodiment of ‘the international
community’ for the purpose of representative decision-making on
whether to engage in geoengineering, even if particular methods are
(also) regulated by particular treaty instruments?
9
Existing approaches to the question of the extent of
international legal regulation of geoengineering
Catalogue existing treaties by virtue of geographic
and substantive scope:
• Where does the treaty apply?
• What activities/substances are regulated by it?
• What substantive standards, if any, apply
(benchmarks, threshold of harm, etc)?
• What institutional and enforcement machinery
exists, if any?
• How widespread is participation? Is it a ‘living
instrument’ or a ‘sleeping treaty’?
• Is there an exit?
10
Snapshot of potentially applicable
international rules and instruments
• Certain generally applicable customary obligations, such as the
general obligation on States to regulate actors and activities under
their jurisdiction and control so as not to cause transboundary harm to
other States, or to areas beyond national jurisdiction; duty to notify and
to consult [note frailties of cil – no institutional building or permitting
regime for example]
16
Ocean Iron Fertilization – 1972 London
Convention (LC) and 1996 Protocol (LP)
• the question of control over geoengineering research and
experimentation has already arisen
• States parties are requested (and other governments ‘urged’) to ensure that
ocean fertilization activities do not take place until there is an adequate
scientific basis on which to justify such activities and a ‘global transparent
and effective control and regulatory mechanism is in place for these
activities’. An exception is made for small-scale research studies within
‘coastal waters’ for scientific purposes, without generation or selling of carbon
offsets or for any other commercial purposes (Conference of the Parties (COP)
9 Decision IX/16 2008).
• Current state of international law supports the latter, i.e. that no existing treaty
provides a blanket prohibition on geoengineering [unless for military/hostile
purposes], though the possibility exists; some texts could be adapted to
address particular geoengineering methods
20
If legally binding, some design features:
• Definition of activities to be regulated (threshold)
• Total ban, or prohibit unless permitted (subject to
conditions), or permitted (subject to conditions) unless
prohibited?
• Burden of proof: on proposer?
• For activity to proceed and/or for liability for any/resulting
harm: no harm? Negligible harm? Significant adverse
harm? Balancing of harm (eg to environment) against
benefit of geoengineering?
• Requirement of prior notification? Prior consent? To/by
whom?
• Prior environmental impact assessment? Strategic
environmental assessment?
• Monitoring, reporting and verification
• Transparency and public participation in decision-making
• Liability provisions? Compensation fund? Compliance?
21
General Principles of Conduct for Research
• Submission to (UK) House of Commons Select Committee on Science and
Technology 2010:
22
PREAMBLE TO THE OXFORD DRAFT PRINCIPLES FOR
THE CONDUCT OF GEOENGINEERING RESEARCH
Recognising the fundamental importance of mitigation and adaptation
in combating climate change and its adverse effects;
Acknowledging nonetheless that if, in the near future, the international
community has failed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and urgent
action is needed to prevent catastrophic climate change then it may be
necessary to resort to techniques involving deliberate large-scale
intervention in the Earth’s climate system (‘geoengineering’);
Ensuring that, in the event such resort is necessary, potential
geoengineering techniques have been thoroughly investigated to
determine, which, if any, techniques will be effective in addressing the
issue of climate change without producing unacceptable environmental
and socio-economic impacts;
Recognising that there are a variety of proposed geoengineering
techniques which differ both in what they are trying to achieve (Solar
Radiation Management or Carbon Dioxide Removal) and how they are
trying to achieve it (engineered solutions or interventions in ecosystems)
so that each must be assessed on its own terms, rather than applying a
one-size fits all governance approach;
• Noting that there is no empirical evidence to suggest researching
geoengineering techniques will undermine climate change mitigation
efforts;
• Emphasizing the importance of proceeding cautiously with
responsible research so as to assess the potential advantages and
disadvantages of proposed geoengineering techniques, recognizing
that failure to do so will not reduce the probability that such techniques
may be resorted to, but will mean that such resort will take place in the
absence of a sufficient evidence base on which to determine which
techniques carry the least risk;
• Stressing that research into geoengineering techniques does not lead
inevitably to deployment, and that principles to govern research may
need to be adapted to guide decisions regarding deployment, if any;
• Recognising that the regulation of geoengineering research by
existing national, regional and international laws and regulations may
be sufficient, but that governance gaps may emerge requiring the
creation of new rules and institutions;
• Propose the following principles to guide research into
geoengineering techniques:
24
• Principle 1: Geoengineering to be regulated as a public
good
25
Principle 1: Geoengineering to be regulated
[as a][in the] public good.
26
Principle 2: Public participation in
geoengineering decision-making
• Wherever possible, those conducting geoengineering
research should be required to notify, consult, and ideally
obtain the prior informed consent of, those affected by the
research activities. The identity of affected parties will be
dependent on the specific technique which is being
researched - for example, a technique which captures
carbon dioxide from the air and geologically sequesters it
within the territory of a single state will likely require
consultation and agreement only at the national or local
level, while a technique which involves changing the
albedo of the planet by injecting aerosols into the
stratosphere will likely require global agreement.
27
Principle 3: Disclosure of geoengineering
research and open publication of results
28
Principle 4: Independent assessment of
impacts
30
COMMITTEE EXPOUNDED FURTHER
PRINCIPLES:
31