Schlagwort: governance

Peer-reviewed Publications

Redgwell (2025): Technological Change and the Law of the Sea: The Challenge of Marine Geoengineering

Redgwell, C, IN: Oxford Research Archive (ORA), https://doi.org/10.1017/s0020589325101127

A significant impetus for the negotiation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) was the impact of new technological and scientific developments on the law of the sea. Such developments have continued apace, raising the question of how UNCLOS continues to respond to new uses of, and threats to, the oceans. This article focuses on marine geoengineering as an emerging technological response to the climate emergency and its regulation by the specialised global dumping regime of the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter and its Protocol within the general normative framework provided by UNCLOS.

LINK

#
Peer-reviewed Publications

Waller et al. (2025): Responsible research and innovation of carbon removal in the UK: strategies for field trials

Laurie Waller, Emily Cox, Amy Binner, Tatiana Cantillo Garcia, Rosie Everett, Karen Henwood, Julie Ingram, Carol Morris, Kate O’Sullivan, Nick Pidgeon, Catherine Price, Mark Reed, Alessandro Silvestri and Rob Bellamy, IN: Frontiers in Climate, https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2025.1658453

Demonstrating methods for removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is now a focus of research and development programmes designed to support decision making about future technology deployment. In this perspective piece, the authors outline some of the approaches to responsible research and innovation (RRI) being put to work in a UK-based programme organising field trials of various carbon removal methods. Unlike the disruptive technologies that predominate in RRI scholarship, many land-based methods for carbon removal have already been deployed, in some cases over many decades, with governance closely linked with longstanding fields of research and practice.

LINK

#
Peer-reviewed Publications

Hope & Vaughan (2025): Insights lost at points of vulnerability in UK policy evidence gathering on Carbon Dioxide Removal

Aimie L. B. Hope and Naomi Vaughan, IN: CDRxiv Preprint, https://doi.org/10.70212/cdrxiv.2025412.v1

The methods, quantity, and timing of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is impacted by, and has implications for, decarbonising energy, land use change, agriculture, the earth system response, and global society. Uncertainties in each plus the rapid development of CDR methods and policy, make decision-making challenging. Insights from the social sciences and humanities are underrepresented in CDR decision-making. Qualitative evidence and theoretical insights are challenging to synthesise with quantitative policy outputs and decision tools. Real-world complexities may therefore be missed from feasibility assessments and decision-making around CDR, with consequent risks to delivery. The authors focus on expert consultation procedures to identify points where real-world insights may be lost. The focus is non-statutory consultations with significant two-way dialogue and multiple stakeholders. Non-statutory processes are less scrutinised and more fluid, with greater scope for the quality of evidence to be impacted by institutional and human biases. Twenty-six semi-structured online interviews were conducted with individuals from NGOs, policy, industry, and academia who work on CDR and related areas. Interviews capture both inside (i.e., policymaker) and outside (i.e., stakeholder) perspectives on evidence gathering procedures.

LINK

#
Peer-reviewed Publications

Roeschel (2025): Towards system-aware governance of marine carbon dioxide removal: a review of interdependent challenges

Lina Roeschel, IN: Environmental Research Letters, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ae0493

Marine carbon dioxide removal (mCDR) is increasingly discussed as a potential climate response, yet its governance remains underdeveloped. This study conducts a structured literature review, following the PRISMA framework, to identify and analyse governance challenges associated with mCDR within the broader context of multilateral ocean governance. Using the Socio-Ecological-Technological Systems (SETS) framework, challenges were systematically coded to capture interdependencies across social, ecological, and technological domains.

LINK

#
Peer-reviewed Publications

Fritz et al. (2025): Between inflated expectations and inherent distrust: How publics see the role of experts in governing climate intervention technologies

Livia Fritz, Lucilla Losi, Chad M. Baum, Sean Low, Benjamin K. Sovacool IN: Environmental Science and Policy, 164, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104005

Addressing questions around more effective governance of novel technologies for removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and proposals around solar radiation modification necessitates reflections on how different kinds of expertise, normative judgments and democratic decision-making (should) interact. Based on a survey (N = 22,222) and 44 focus groups (N = 323) in 22 countries, the authors show (i) who publics see as an expert in the field of climate intervention technologies, (ii) what roles they envision for experts in governing climate intervention technologies and (iii) how trust and distrust in scientists unfolds in the context of these novel, partly controversial, technologies.

LINK

#
Peer-reviewed Publications

Nature – Malakar et al. (2025): Navigating stakeholder heterogeneity in carbon dioxide removal governance

Yuwan Malakar, Kerryn Brent, Audrey Bester, John Gardner, Will Howard, Andrew Lenton IN: Nature Reviews Clean Technology, 1, https://doi.org/10.1038/s44359-024-00006-0

Responsible carbon dioxide removal (CDR) governance will require engagement with numerous stakeholders who have differing agendas, roles and influence in the CDR landscape. However, there is little guidance on how to understand and appropriately engage with this heterogeneous set of stakeholders. In this Perspective, the authors discuss how to navigate stakeholder heterogeneity and engagement in CDR, using a framework based on multi-level perspective and stakeholder theory.

LINK

#
Peer-reviewed Publications

Boettcher & Brent (2024): The potential of the BBNJ clearing house mechanism to enhance knowledge pluralism in marine carbon dioxide removal assessment

Miranda, Boettcher, Kerryn Brent IN: Frontiers in Climate, 6, doi: 10.3389/fclim.2024.1497476

The open ocean, which already absorbs a substantial portion of anthropogenic carbon dioxide, is increasingly seen as a promising site for various types of marine carbon dioxide removal (mCDR). All of these approaches are in the preliminary stages of development, and many questions remain with regard to their assessment and governance. This paper discusses the potential role of the newly established Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement) in assessing and governing mCDR.

LINK

#
Science-Policy Documents

Grubert & Talati (2023): The distortionary effects of unconstrained for-profit carbon dioxide removal and the need for early governance intervention

Emily Grubert, Shuchi Talati IN: Carbon Management, https://doi.org/10.1080/17583004.2023.2292111

Governance and institutions, especially related to how CDR is allocated and paid for, will fundamentally shape CDR efforts, including by structurally incentivizing particular approaches and monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) objectives. The authors argue that the emerging tendency toward market-based, unconstrained, and for-profit CDR presents fundamental and predictable risks for climate and justice goals. Such a model incentivizes growth in profitable compensatory removal applications, effectively allocating limited resources based on ability to pay rather than public good, while also increasing the amount of CDR required to meet global climate targets. They describe the need, development context, function, and resource limitations of CDR, then characterize the major challenges with the emerging unconstrained, for-profit governance model.

LINK

#
Peer-reviewed Publications

Stanley (2023): Carbon ‘known not grown’: Reforesting Scotland, advanced measurement technologies, and a new frontier of mitigation deterrence

Theo Stanley IN: Environmental Science & Policy, 151, 103636, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2023.103636

In Scotland, private companies are bringing these Advanced Measurement Technologies (AMTs) from ecological science to market. Companies offer landowners the chance to independently measure and verify natural capital commodities, such as woodland carbon credits, using these technologies. Drawing from 61 interviews with stakeholders in the Scottish land sector, alongside six months of ethnographic research, this paper explores the climate governance consequences of high-tech forest carbon measurement.

LINK

#
Science-Policy Documents

Edenhofer et al. (2023): On the Governance of Carbon Dioxide Removal – A Public Economics Perspective

Ottmar Edenhofer, Max Franks, Matthias Kalkuhl, Artur Runge-Metzger; CESifo Working Paper No. 10370

This working paper highlights the importance of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies for climate policy. The authors first describe their role in iconic transformation pathways and discuss removal costs and storage duration of different technologies. Based on economic principles, the authors characterize optimal removal flows and reservoirs for non-permanent removals. Furthermore, they discuss different pricing regimes that achieve an optimal allocation under different information and liability conditions.

LINK

#