This Title All WIREs
How to cite this WIREs title:
WIREs Clim Change
Impact Factor: 7.385

Dual high‐stake emerging technologies: a review of the climate engineering research literature

Full article on Wiley Online Library:   HTML PDF

Can't access this content? Tell your librarian.

The literature on climate engineering, or geoengineering, covers a wide range of potential methods for solar radiation management or carbon dioxide removal that vary in technical aspects, temporal and spatial scales, potential environmental impacts, and legal, ethical, and governance challenges. This paper presents a comprehensive review of social and natural science papers on this topic since 2006 and listed in SCOPUS and Web of Science. It adds to previous literature reviews by combining analyses of bibliometric patterns and of trends in how the technologies are framed in terms of content, motivations, stakes, and recommendations. Most peer‐reviewed climate engineering literature does not weigh the risks and new, additional, benefits of the various technologies, but emphasizes either the potential dangers of climate engineering or the climate change consequences of refraining from considering the research, development, demonstration, and/or deployment of climate engineering technologies. To analyse this polarity, not prevalent in the literature on earlier emerging technologies, we explore the concept of dual high‐stake technologies. As appeals to fear have proven ineffective in spurring public engagement in climate change, we may not expect significant public support for climate engineering technologies whose rationale is not to achieve benefits in addition to avoiding the high stakes of climate change. Furthermore, in designing public engagement exercises, researchers must be careful not to steer discussions by emphasizing one type of stake framing over another. A dual high‐stake, rather than risk–benefit, framing should also be considered in analysing some emerging technologies with similar characteristics, for example, nanotechnology for pollution control. WIREs Clim Change 2015, 6:255–268. doi: 10.1002/wcc.333 This article is categorized under: Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Knowledge and Practice
Publications in WoS identified by the keywords ‘climate engineering’ and ‘geoengineering’.
[ Normal View | Magnified View ]
Social science abstracts addressing stakes related to climate change, climate engineering, or both.
[ Normal View | Magnified View ]
Natural science abstracts addressing stakes related to climate change, climate engineering, or both.
[ Normal View | Magnified View ]
Abstracts specifically addressing the role of climate engineering in climate action.
[ Normal View | Magnified View ]
Starting point for the analysis in all natural and social science abstracts (Relative share of number of starting points mentioned).
[ Normal View | Magnified View ]
Specific climate engineering technologies addressed in natural and social science abstracts (number of abstracts).
[ Normal View | Magnified View ]
Number of CDR and SRM abstracts specifically addressing SRM and/or CDR.
[ Normal View | Magnified View ]
Frequency of climate engineering abstracts, 2006–2013; author categorization adjusted from SCOPUS.
[ Normal View | Magnified View ]

Related Articles

Engineering Global Climate

Browse by Topic

Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Knowledge and Practice

Access to this WIREs title is by subscription only.

Recommend to Your
Librarian Now!

The latest WIREs articles in your inbox

Sign Up for Article Alerts