Search

This paper suggests how the regulation of Solar Radiation Management (SRM) field research in Europe could be designed to maximise the possibility of securing legitimacy. It argues that legitimacy is maximised when regulatory frameworks are legal, and also responsive, flexible, deliberative and inclusive. By adopting an 'incorporated' approach to assessing the risk of Solar Radiation Management (SRM) field research, the EU can import elements of 'directly deliberative polyarchy' into its otherwise orthodox constitutional regulatory approach thereby maximising legitimacy. The argument is new in so far as it juxtaposes two conceptions of procedural legitimacy - one institutional and the other functional - in the context of significant scientific uncertainty in the technocratic regulatory paradigm of the EU. The significance of the work is that it draws on these conceptions of legitimacy to advance a pragmatic model of institutional design which comprises procedures that maximise legitimacy with minimal disruption to the EU's institutional balance of powers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Climate engineering in general and solar radiationmanagement (SRM) in particular raise profound and complex political, legal, social, and ethical questions that go well beyond technicalfeasibility issues. We consider three such questions. First, can existing EU decision-making processes accommodate sufficient public engagement to ensure legitimate decisions on SRM? Second, does politics influence the choice of legislative procedure for SRM regulation? Third, does the choice of legislative procedure influence the likelihood of SRMimplementation? Three main conclusions emerge from our analysis. First, existing EU decision-making processes can - given certain conditions - accommodate considerable public engagement and hence ensure legitimate decisions on SRM. Second, politics matters; indeed, the EU's choice of legislative procedure concerning SRM may well become subject to political negotiations. Finally, the choice of legislative procedure may substantially influence the likelihood of SRM implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explores the prospects for the European Union (EU) to develop a coherent policy regarding climate engineering (CE). It discusses significant legal parameters derived from EU law from which such a future EU policy would have to arise. . It is opined that climate engineering carries risks unlike any of the previous policy responses to climate change.

The article presents the author's views on climate change with specific reference to the policy of European Union (EU) in this regard. It is informed that the Commission has adopted very aggressive targets for reducing the greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change, and intends to allocate 20 percent of the EU's budget for climate-related activities. It mentions that Europe was at the forefront in crafting the new Paris climate agreement.