nach oben

Erschienen in:

2021 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

1. Talking Tomorrow’s Technology, Framing Political Choice?

verfasst von : Judith Kreuter

Erschienen in: Climate Engineering as an Instance of Politicization

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Kreuter provides a concise discussion of the role of emerging ideas of Climate Engineering in the broader context of global climate governance. She discusses ‘wickedness’ in the sense of the non-existence of a clearly right solution, with regards to both challenges—anthropogenic climate change on the one hand and Climate Engineering as a potential measure to address this problem on the other. Kreuter explores the empirical case of the current academic discussion of Climate Engineering as an instance of politicization which offers the opportunity to open up the topic to deliberation and political decision-making.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nächstes Kapitel An Idea—And More Than an Idea: Climate Engineering in Research and Decision-Making

In accordance with the frame analysis approach applied in this thesis, I assume that every actor frames in communication. Accordingly, I frame when introducing the present study. I chose a frame highlighting the relevance of the topic of the present thesis by referring to the duality of high stakes related to the impacts of anthropogenic climate change, on one hand, and climate engineering (CE) approaches, on the other. Alternatively, I could have decided, for example, to focus mainly on the impacts of potential CE or on the impacts of climate change.

All accentuations in citations in this thesis (e.g. italics) are adopted from the original unless explicitly stated otherwise.

Instead of the term ‘geoengineering’, I use the term CE in this thesis to denote the same set of approaches.

The Initiative changed its name in June 2019; up to that point, it was called Carnegie Council Geoengineering Governance Initiative (C2G2) (Pasztor 2019).

A few exceptions exist, for example amendments to the London Convention/London Protocol (Ginzky and Frost 2014) and decisions by the parties to the CBD (CBD 2010) concerning CE. Most recently, Switzerland submitted a draft resolution at the fourth Session of the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) proposing “a global assessment of potential risks and benefits of geoengineering technologies” (IISD Reporting Services 2019: 13). The draft resolution was, however, withdrawn after no agreement could be found on a number of issues pertaining to the resolution.

For example, Reynolds and Wagner (2019) argue that decentralized solar CE “appears at once technically possible and economically feasible”, which would make it available to individual states or even non-state actors.

For a more detailed discussion of the term ‘legitimacy’, see Sect. 1.1.3 as well as Chap. 3.

For a detailed description of this framework, see Chap. 3.

For a list of various definitions of the political, see, for example, Pelinka and Varwick (2010: 20).

Translated by JK, original quote: Es geht in diesem System um die Produktion von kollektiv bindenden Entscheidungen, die durch den Einsatz des zentralen Mediums der Macht gespeist werden. (Zürn 2013: 14)

Translated by JK, original quote: […] Teilsystem Wirtschaft, das der Logik des Gewinns folgt und den Preis als zentrales Medium hat. (Zürn 2013: 15)

Translated by JK, original quote: Im politischen Raum wird geklärt, in welchem gesellschaftlichen Teilsystem und nach welcher Funktionslogik bestimmte Entscheidungen gefällt werden sollen. (Zürn 2013: 17)

Translated by JK; original quote: “Verschiebung zwischen funktional differenzierten Sphären” (Zürn 2013: 21)

Zürn uses the term ‘horizontal’ to contrast vertical p., which indicates the shift of an issue inside one specific subsystem from one geographical level to another, e.g. from the national to the international level. (Zürn 2013: 21)

Translated by JK; original quote: “Sind es Staaten, Nichtregierungsorganisationen, Medien oder individuelle Experten?” (Zürn 2013: 21).

This is not an attempt to offer a comprehensive overview over this very rich strand of literature, but rather to provide some systematic guidance in this field in order to be able, as a next step, to situate the present thesis in it.

This set of studies often applies the British notation ‘politicisation’ instead of the US-American spelling ‘politicization’.

Interestingly, Zürn in 2008 discusses the critical claim that many issues of international political action have become economized—shifted to a sphere of market logic—and offers the interpretation that “as the market gains grounds on politics, the market becomes politicized.” (Zürn 2008: 293)

Translated by JK; original quote: “Wissenschaft unterliegt der Logik der Wahrheit und nutzt Reputation als zentrales Medium.” (Zürn 2013: 15)

An early account of a depoliticizing tendency in environmental politics is offered by Hajer (1997: 54).

See Chap. 3.

Geotechnical engineering is a sub-discipline of civil engineering and refers to “the manipulation or study of components of the earth” (Mercer et al. 2011: 4). Geotechnical engineering projects aim at, for example, protecting populations against the impacts of earth quakes or designing earthworks.

Both terms ‘climate engineering’ and ‘geoengineering’ were applied in the document search to generate the corpus of data as the latter is highly frequent in particular in Anglo-American literature.

A convincing alternative differentiation is proposed by Heyward (2013), who differentiates five types of responses to climate change, two of which are CDR and SRM, respectively.

In this, I follow the understanding of the term ‘socio-technical system’ as encompassing all three dimensions as espoused in Geels (2007: 127); Schot and Kanger (2018: 1045), rather than conceive of the ‘system’ as comprising only the material dimension (devices and infrastructures) and differentiating from it the ‘regime’ (rules and procedures) and the actors involved (Geels 2004: 898, 903).

Translated by JK; Original: “Ein Forschungsdesign ist ein Plan, der festlegt, wie das Forschungsprojekt ausgeführt werden soll, und insbesondere, wie empirische Evidenz dafür verwendet werden soll, um Antworten auf die Forschungsfragen zu erhalten.” (Gschwend and Schimmelfennig 2007: 13)

Translated by JK; Original: “Grob gesagt kann man wissenschaftliche Forschung als Dialog zwischen Theorie und Daten verstehen.” (Gschwend and Schimmelfennig 2007: 14)

Translated by JK; Original: “Dabei gibt es ein Wechselspiel zwischen Theorien und Daten, das in beide Richtungen verläuft.” (Behnke et al. 2012: 27)

A theory is, for this purpose, defined as a set of general statements about reality (Behnke et al. 2012: 21; Spindler and Schieder 2010: 20). Theories of international relations are defined following Spindler and Schieder (2010: 20): “Theorien der Internationalen Beziehungen treffen […] allgemeine Aussagen über [das] […] Beziehungsgeflecht grenzüberschreitender Interaktionen und das darin politisch relevante, auf Wertzuweisungen ausgerichtete Handeln von staatlichen und nichtstaatlichen Akteuren.”

This number is subject to a range of uncertainties elaborated in Rogelj et al. (2018: 107).

Italics are mine.

Such as LOHAFEX, SOIREE or E-PEACE.

Instances of political decisions on CE approaches are presented, for example, by amendments to the London Convention/London Protocol (Ginzky and Frost 2014) and decisions by the parties to the CBD (2010).

Report in German; title translated by JK: “Climate Engineering and our climate objectives—a debate that is past due”.

C2G2 recently changed its name to Carnegie Climate Governance Initiative (C2G), see Pasztor (2019).

In the present thesis, the property of interest is the effect of the meaning of CE on decision-making. This is, however, not based on observation—as CE is not yet, commonly, discussed in decision-making arenas—but derived from theory (e.g., frame theory, practice theory).

www.webofknowledge.com, Clarivate.

Adler E, Pouliot V (2011) International practices. Int Theor 3(1):1–36. https://doi.org/10.1017/S175297191000031XCrossRef

Akerlof K, Rowan KE, Fitzgerald D, Cedeno AY (2012) Communication of climate projections in US media amid politicization of model science. Nature Clim Change 2(9):648–654. https://doi.org/10.1038/NCLIMATE1542CrossRef

Allen, M. R., Dube, O. P., Solecki, W., Aragón-Durand, F., Cramer, W., Humphreys, S., et al. (2018). Framing and context. In: Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pörtner HO, Roberts D, Skea J, Shukla PR et al (eds) Global warming of 1.5 °C. An IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. Geneva, IPCC, pp 49–92

Anshelm J, Hultman M (2015) discourses of global climate change: apocalyptic framing and political antagonisms. Routledge, London

Anshelm J, Haikola S, Wallsten B (2018) Politicizing environmental governance—a case study of heterogeneous alliances and juridical struggles around Ojnare Forest, Sweden. Geoforum 91:206–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.03.003CrossRef

Asayama S, Sugiyama M, Ishii A (2017) Ambivalent climate of opinions: tensions and dilemmas in understanding geoengineering experimentation. Geoforum 80:82–92CrossRef

Balzacq T (2010) Constructivism and securitization studies. In: Cavelty MD, Mauer V (eds) The Routledge handbook of security studies. Routledge, London, pp 56–72

Bates S, Jenkins L, Amery F (2014) (De)politicisation and the father’s clause parliamentary debates. Pol Polit 42(2):243–258CrossRef

Behnke J, Baur N, Behnke N (2012) Empirische Methoden der Politikwissenschaft (2. aktualisierte, Auflage edn. Ferninand Schöningh, Paderborn

Bellamy R (2016) A sociotechnical framework for governing climate engineering. Sci Technol Human Values 41(2):135–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243915591855CrossRef

Bellamy R, Chilvers J, Vaughan NE, Lenton TM (2012b) A review of climate geoengineering appraisals. WIREs Clim Change 3(6):597–615CrossRef

Bellamy R, Chilvers J, Vaughan NE, Lenton TM (2012a) Appraising geoengineering. Tyndall Working Paper Series, 153

Biermann F, Möller I (2019) Rich man’s solution? Climate engineering discourses and the marginalization of the South. International Environmental Agreements, Online first, 1–17

Bijker WE (2006) Why and how technology matters. In: Goodin RE, Tilly C (eds) The Oxford handbook of contextual political analysis. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 681–706

Bolsen T, Druckman JN (2018) Do partisanship and politicization undermine the impact of a scientific consensus message about climate change? Group Process Intergr Relat 21(3):389–402. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430217737855CrossRef

Bolsen T, Palm R, Kingsland JT (2019) Counteracting climate science politicization with effective frames and imagery. Sci Commun 41(2):147–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547019834565CrossRef

Burnham P (2001) New Labour and the politics of depoliticisation. Brit J Polit Int Relat 3(2):127–149CrossRef

Burnham P (2014) Depoliticisation: economic crisis and political management. Pol Polit 42(2):189–206CrossRef

C2G2 (2019) C2G2 mission. https://www.c2g2.net/c2g2-mission/. Accessed 22 Mar 2019

Cairns R (2013) Examining framings of geoengineering using Q methodology. Climate Geoengineering Governance Working Paper Series, 002

Cairns R (2014) Climate geoengineering: issues of path-dependence and socio-technical lock-in. WIREs Clim Change 5:649–661. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.296CrossRef

Cairns R, Stirling A (2014) ‘Maintaining planetary systems’ or ‘concentrating global power’? High stakes in contending framings of climate geoengineering. Glob Environ Change 28:25–38CrossRef

Carr W, Yung L, Preston CJ (2014) Swimming upstream: engaging the American public early on climate engineering. Bull Atom Scient 70(3):38–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0096340214531180CrossRef

CBD (2010) Decision adopted by the conference of the parties to the convention on biological diversity at its tenth meeting: X/33. Biodiversity and Climate Change. Nagoya: Convention on Biological Diversity

Costa O (2019) The politicization of EU external relations. Journal of European Public Policy 26(5):790–802. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2018.1478878CrossRef

Dennison J, Geddes A (2018) Brexit and the perils of ‘Europeanised’ migration. J Europ Publ Pol 25(8):1137–1153. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2018.1467953CrossRef

de Wilde P, Leupold A, Schmidtke H (2016) Introduction: the differentiated politicisation of European governance. West Europ Polit 39(1):3–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2015.1081505CrossRef

Dryzek JS (2006) Deliberative global politics. Discourse and democracy in a divided world. Cambridge et al, Polity

DWD (2019) Pressemitteilung: Klima-Pressekonferenz 2019 des Deutschen Wetterdienstes. Neue Langfristvorhersagen ermöglichen Prognose von Dürren in Deutschland. Pressemitteilungen des DWD. https://www.dwd.de/DE/presse/pressekonferenzen/DE/2019/PK_26_03_2019/pressekonferenz.html

Eastham SD, Weisenstein DK, Keith DW, Barrett SRH (2018) Quantifying the impact of sulfate geoenginering on mortality from air quality and UV-B exposure. Atmos Environ 187:424–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2018.05.047CrossRef

Easton D (1953) Political system. an inquiry into the state of political science. David A. Knopf, New York

Ecker-Ehrhardt M (2018) Self-legitimation in the face of politicization: Why international organizations centralized public communication. Rev Int Organ 13(4):519–546. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-017-9287-yCrossRef

Entman RM (1993) Framing: toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. J Commun 43(4):51–58CrossRef

Flinders M, Wood M (2014) Depoliticisation, governance and the state. Pol Polit 42(2):139–149

Foster EA, Kerr P, Byrne C (2014) Rolling back to roll forward: depoliticisation and the extension of government. Pol Polit 42(2):225–241CrossRef

Früh W (2011) Inhaltsanalyse: theorie und praxis. UKV, Konstanz

Fuss S, Jones CD, Kraxner F, Peters GP, Smith P, Tavoni M et al (2016) Research priorities for negative emissions. Environ Res Lett 11:115007. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/11/115007CrossRef

Fuss S, Lamb WF, Callaghan MW, Hilaire J, Creutzig F, Amann T et al (2018) Negative emissions—Part 2: costs, potentials and side effects. Environ Res Lett 13. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aabf9f

Gasser T, Guivarch C, Tachiiri K, Jones CD, Ciais P (2015) Negative emissions physically needed to keep global warming below 2 & C. Nat Commun 6:7958. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8958CrossRef

Geels FW (2004) From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems. Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Res Pol 33:897–920CrossRef

Geels FW (2007) Transformations of large technical systems: a multilevel analysis of the dutch highway system (1950–2000). Sci Technol Human Values 32(2):123–149CrossRef

Geels FW, Schot J (2007) Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Res Pol 36:399–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.01.003CrossRef

Giddens A (1984) The constitution of society: outline of the theory of structuration. Polity Press, Cambridge

Ginzky H, Frost R (2014) Marine geo-engineering: legally binding regulation under the london protocol. Carbon Clim Law Rev 8(2):82–96

Goeminne G (2012) Lost in translation: climate denial and the return of the political. Global Environ Politics 12(2):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1162/GLEP_a_00104

Goldberg D, Lackner KS (2015) Creating negative emissions at remote CO₂ sequestration sites. Greenhouse Gases Sci Technol 5:238–240. https://doi.org/10.1002/ghgCrossRef

Greene CH, Huntley ME, Archibald I, Gerber LN, Sills DL, Granados J et al (2017) Geoengineering, marine microalgae, and climate stabilization in the 21st century. Earth’s Future 5:278–284. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016EF000486CrossRef

Gschwend T, Schimmelfennig F (2007) Forschungsdesign in der Politikwissenschaft: ein Dialog zwischen Theorie und Daten. In: Gschwend T, Schimmelfennig F (eds) Forschungsdesign in der Politikwissenschaft: Probleme —Strategien—Anwendungen. Campus, Frankfurt am Main, pp 13–35

Gupta A, Möller I (2018) De facto governance: how authoritative assessments construct climate engineering as an object of governance. Environ Polit. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2018.1452373CrossRef

Haas PM (1992) Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination. Int Org 46(1):1–35CrossRef

Hajer M (1997) The politics of environmental discourse. Ecological modernization and the policy process. Clarendon Press, OxfordCrossRef

Hajer M (2006) Doing discourse analysis: coalitions, practices, meaning. In: Van den Brink M, Metze T (eds) Words matter in policy and planning. Discourse theory and method in the social sciences. Utrecht, KNAG, pp 65–74

Hamilton C (2013) Earthmasters. the dawn of the age of climate engineering. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT

Hay C (2014) Depoliticisation as process, governance as practice: what did the ‘first wave’ get wrong and do we need a ‘second wave’ to put it right? Pol Polit 42(2):293–311. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557314X13959960668217CrossRef

Hay C (2007) Why we hate politics. Cambridge, MA, Polity

Heyward C (2013) Situating and abandoning geoengineering: a typology of five responses to dangerous climate change. Polit Sci Polit, PS, pp 23–27

Hoegh-Guldberg O, Jacob D, Taylor M, Bindi M, Brown S, Camilloni I et al (2018) Impacts of 1.5 °C global warming on natural and human systems. In: Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pörtner HO, Roberts D, Skea J, Shukla PR et al (eds) Global Warming of 1.5 °C. An IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. Geneva, IPCC, pp 175–312

Horton JB, Keith DW, Honegger M (2016) Implications of the Paris agreement for carbon dioxide removal and solar geoengineering. Harvard project on climate agreements—viewpoints, July 2016

Hulme M (2014) Can science fix climate change? A case against climate engineering. Polity Press, Cambridge, UK

Hulme M (2010) The idea of climate change: exploring complexity, plurality and opportunity. Gaia 19(3):171–174

Huttunen S, Hildén M (2014) Framing the controversial: geoengineering in academic literature. Sci Commun 36(3):3–29CrossRef

IEA (2019) Global energy and CO₂ status report. The latest trends in energy and emissions in 2018. In: Agency IE (ed), Paris, France

IISD Reporting Services (2019) Summary of the fourth session of the united nations environment assembly. Earth Negotiations Bulletin 16(153)

IPCC (2013a) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge UK, IPCC

IPCC (2014a) Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge UK: IPCC

IPCC (2014b) Climate change 2014: synthesis report. Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. In: Pachauri RK, Meyer LA (eds) Geneva: IPCC

IPCC (2018a) Global Warming of 1.5 °C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. Summary for Policymakers. In IPCC (ed). Geneva, IPCC

Jessop B (2014) Repoliticising depoliticisation: theoretical preliminaries on some responses to the American fiscal and Eurozone debt crises. Pol Polit 42(2):207–223CrossRef

Jinnah S (2018) Why govern climate engineering? A preliminary framework for demand-based governance. Int Stud Rev 20(2):272–282. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viy022CrossRef

Jones CD, Ciais P, Davis SJ, Friedlingstein P, Gasser T, Peters GP et al (2016) Simulating the Earth system response to negative emissions. Environ Res Lett 11. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/9/095012

Kahneman D, Tversky A (1984) Choices, values, and frames. Am Psychol 39(4):341–350CrossRef

Keith DW (2013) A case for climate engineering. Boston Review, Cambridge/LondonCrossRef

Keller DP, Lenton A, Littleton EW, Oschlies A, Scott V, Vaughan NE (2018) The effects of carbon dioxide removal on the carbon cycle. Curr Clim Change Rep 4:250–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-018-0104-3CrossRef

Kreidenweis U, Humpenöder F, Stevanovic M, Bodirsky BL, Kriegler E, Lotze-Campen E et al (2016) Afforestation to mitigate climate change: impacts on food prices under consideration of albedo effects. Environ Res Lett 11:085001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/8/085001CrossRef

Kreuter J (2018) Climate engineering and political decision-making: the importance of polarity in the academic debate. INoGOV Policy Brief

Kreuter J, Lederer M (Under review) The geopolitics of negative emissions technologies—learning lessons from REDD+ and Renewable Energies for Afforestation, BECCS and Direct Air Capture

Kriegler E, Luderer G, Bauer N, Baumstark L, Popp A, Rogelj J, et al (2018) Pathways to limiting warming to 1.5 °C: a tale of turning around in no time? Philos Trans Royal Soc A 376(20160457). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2016.0457

Kvidal-Rovik T (2018) Nature articulations in norwegian advertising discourse: a depolicitized discourse of climate change. Environ Commun J Nat Cult 12(6):794–806. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2018.1482835CrossRef

Lakoff G (2014) The all new don’t think of an elephant!: Know your values and frame the debate, 2nd edn. Chelsea Green Publishing, Chelsea, VT

Lasswell HD (1958) Politics: who gets what, when, how. Meridian Books, New York

Lawrence MG, Schäfer S, Muri H, Scott V, Oschlies A, Vaughan NE et al (2018) Evaluation climate geoengineering proposals in the context of the Paris agreement temperature goals. Nat Commun 9(3734). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-05938-3

Lederer M (2017) Carbon trading: who gets what, when, and how? Global Environ Polit 17(3):134–140. https://doi.org/10.1162/GLEP_a_00419

Lederer M, Kreuter J (2018) Organising the unthinkable in times of crises: will climate engineering become the weapon of last resort in the Anthropocene? Organization 25(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508418759186

Linnér B-O, Wibeck V (2015) Dual high-stake emerging technologies: a review of the climate engineering research literature. WIREs Clim Change 6:255–268CrossRef

Long J, Loy F, Morgan MG (2015) Policy: start research on climate engineering. Nature 518(7537)

Luokkanen M, Huttunen S, Hildén M (2014) Geoengineering, news media and metaphors: framing the controversial. Public Understand Sci 23(8):966–981. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662513475966CrossRef

Marchetti C (1977) On geoengineering and the CO₂ problem. Clim Change 1:59–68CrossRef

Markusson N (2013) Tensions in framings of geoengineering: constitutive diversity and ambivalence. Climate Geoengineering Governance Working Paper Series, 003

Markusson N, Venturini T, Laniado D, Kaltenbrunner A (2016) Contrasting medium and genre von Wikipedia to open up the dominating definition and classification of geoengineering. Big Data and Society, July–December 2016, pp 1–17

Matzner N, Barben D (2018) Verantwortungsvoll das Klima manipulieren? Unsicherheit und Verantwortung im Diskurs um climate engineering. In: Janich N, Rhein L (eds) Unsicherheit als Herauforderung für die Wissenschaft. Peter Lang, Berlin et al., pp 143–179

Mayring P (2014) Qualitative content analysis: theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution. Gesis, Klagenfurth

McCright AM, Dunlap RE (2011) The politicization of climate change and polarization in the American public’s view of global warming, 2001–2010. Sociol Q 52(2):155–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2011.01198.xCrossRef

Mercer AM, Keith DW, Sharp JD (2011) Public understanding of solar radiation management. Environ Res Lett 6:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/6/4/044006CrossRef

Met Office (2018) Chance of summer heatwaves now thirty times more likely

Methmann C, Rothe D, Stephan B (2013a) Interpretive approaches to global climate governance. (De-)constructing the greenhouse. London, Routledge

Methmann C, Rothe D, Stephan B (2013b) Introduction. How and why to deconstruct the greenhouse. In: Methmann C, Rothe D, Stephan B (eds) Interpretive approaches to global climate governance. (De)constructing the greenhouse. London, Routledge, pp 1–22

Methmann C, Rothe D, Stephan B (2013c) Reflections. In: Methmann C, Rothe D, Stephan B (eds) Interpretive approaches to global climate governance. In: (De)constructing the greenhouse. London, Routledge, pp 248–256

Minx JC, Lamb WF, Callaghan MW, Bornmann L, Fuss S (2017) Fast growing research on negative emissions. Environ Res Lett 12. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa5ee5

Minx JC, Lamb WF, Callaghan MW, Fuss S, Hilaire J, Creutzig F et al (2018) Negative emissions—part 1: research landscape and synthesis. Environ Res Lett 13. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aabf9b

Morrow DR (2017) International governance of climate engineering. A survey of Reports on climate engineering, 2009–2015. FCEA Working Paper Series

NAS (2015a) Climate Intervention: Reflecting Sunlight to Cool Earth. The National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C

NAS (2015b) Climate intervention: carbon dioxide removal and reliable sequestration. Reflecting sunlight to cool earth. Washington, DC, National Academy of Sciences

NAS (2015b) Climate intervention: carbon dioxide removal and reliable sequestration. The National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C

OUP (2019 Definition of model in English. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/model. Accessed 28 Mar 2019

Parker A, Irvine JP (2018) The risk of termination shock from solar geoengineering. Earth’s Future 6:456–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017EF000735CrossRef

Parson EA, Keith DW (2013) End the deadlock on governance of geoengineering research. Science 339:1278–1279. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1232527CrossRef

Pasztor J (2017) The need for governance of climate engineering. Ethics Int Affairs 41(4):419–430. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0892679417000405CrossRef

Pasztor J (2019) What’s in a name? Why we became C2G. C2G Blog

Pasztor J, Scharf C, Schmidt K-U (2017) How to govern geoengineering? Science 357(6348):231CrossRef

Pelinka A, Varwick J (2010) Grundzüge der Politikwissenschaft, 2nd edn. UTB, BöhlauCrossRef

Pepermans Y, Maeseele P (2014) Democratic debate and mediated discourses on climate change: from consensus to de/politicization. Environ Commun J Nature Cult 8(2):216–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2014.906482CrossRef

Pepermans Y, Maeseele P (2016) The politicization of climate change: problem or solution? WIREs Clim Change 7:478–485. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.405CrossRef

Pye LW (2001) Political science. In: Krieger J, Crahan ME, Jacbos LR, Joseph WA, Nzogola-Ntalaja G, Paul JA (eds) The oxford companion to politics of the world, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 674–676

Rayner S (2016) What might evans-pritchard have made of two degrees? Anthropol Today 32(4):1–2CrossRef

Rein M, Schön D (1993) Reframing policy discourse. In: Fischer F, Forester J (eds) The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. Duke University Press, Durham, pp 145–166CrossRef

Remling E (2018) Depoliticization adaptation: a critical analysis of EU climate adaptation policy. Environ Polit 27(3):477–497. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2018.1429207CrossRef

Reynolds J, Wagner G (2019) Highly decentralized solar geoengineering. Environmental Politics, Online First, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2019.1648169

Rickels W, Klepper G, Dovern J, Betz G, Brachatzek N, Cacean S et al (2011b) Large-scale intentional interventions into the climate system? assessing the climate engineering debate. Scoping report conducted on behalf of the german federal ministry of education and research (BMBF). Kiel, Kiel Earth Institute

Rittel HWJ, Webber MM (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4:155–169CrossRef

Rockström J, Schellnhuber HJ, Hoskins B, Ramanathan V, Schlosser P, Brasseur GP et al (2016) The world’s biggest gamble. earth’s. Future 4(10):465–470. https://doi.org/2016EF000392

Rogelj J, Shindell D, Jiang K, Fifita S, Ginzburg V, Handa C et al (2018) Mitigation pathways compatible with 1.5 °C in the context of sustainable development. In: Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pörtner HO, Roberts D, Skea J, Shukla PR et al (eds) Global warming of 1.5 °C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. Geneva, IPCC, pp 93–174

Rössler P (2010) Inhaltsanalyse, 2nd edn. UKV, Konstanz

Schmid-Petri H (2017) Politicization of science: how climate change skeptics use experts and scientific evidence in their online communication. Clim Change 145:523–537. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-017-2112-z

Schot J, Kanger L (2018) Deep transitions: emergence, acceleration, stabilization and directionality. Res Policy 47:1045–1059CrossRef

UN Secretary-General (2018) Secretary-general’s remarks on climate change [as delivered]

Shepherd J, Cox P, Haigh D, Keith DW, Launder B, Mace G et al (2009) Geoengineering the climate: science, governance and uncertainty. The Royal Society, London

Smith P, Haszeldine RS, Smith SM (2016) Preliminary assessment of the potential for, and limitiations to, terrestrial emission technologies in the UK. Environ Sci Process Impact 18:1400–1405CrossRef

Spindler M, Schieder S (2010) Theorien in der Lehre von den internationalen Beziehungen. In: Schieder S, Spindler M (eds) Theorien der Internationalen Beziehungen, Auflage edn. Barbara Budrich, Opladen, pp 9–38

SPP 1689 (2019a) Climate Engineering und unsere Klimaziele—eine überfällige Debatte. In C. Schwerpunktprogramm 1689 der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft „Climate Engineering: Risks, Opportunities?“ (SPP 1689) (Ed.). Kiel: Kiel Earth Institute

Steffek J (2003) The legitimation of international governance: a discourse approach. Europ J Int Relat 9(2):249–275CrossRef

Tagesschau.de (2018) Schiffahrt auf Rhein beeinträchtigt. Bundesregierung gibt Ölreserven frei. Tagesschau.de

Talberg A, Christoff P, Thomas S, Karoly D (2018) Geoengineering governance-by-default: an earth system governance perspective. Int Environ Agreem 18:229–253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-017-9374-9CrossRef

Tversky A, Kahneman D (1987) Rational choice and the framing of decisions. In: Hogarth RM, Reder MW (eds) Rational choice: the contrast between economics and psychology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 67–94

Tversky A, Kahneman D (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Sci New Ser 211(4481):453–458

UN (1992) United nations framework convention on climate change

UNEP (2018) Emissions gap report 2018. In UNEP (Ed.). Nairobi, Kenya: UNEP

UNFCCC (2015) Adoption of the Paris agreement. In U. N. F. C. o. C. Change (ed) (Vol. FCCC/CP/2015/L.9/Rev.1). Paris: United Nations

Uther S (2014) Diskurse des Climate Engineering. Argumente, Akteure und Koalitionen in Deutschland und Großbritannien. Wiesbaden, Springer Fachmedien

Van Vuuren D, Stehfest E, Gernaat DEHJ, Van den Berg M, Bijl DL, de Boer HS et al (2018) Alternative pathways to the 1.5 °C target reduce the need for negative emissions. Nat Clim Change 8:391–397CrossRef

Wagenaar H (2011) Meaning in action: interpretation and dialogue in policy analysis. M. E. Sharp, New York

Warner S (2019) (Re)politicising ‘the governmental’: resisting the Industrial Relations Act 1971. Brit J Polit Int Relat Online First. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148119845336CrossRef

Weber M (1980) Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriss der verstehenden Soziologie (5. Revidierte, Studienausgabe edn. Mohr, Tübingen

Weinberg AM (1966) Can technology replace social engineering? Bull Atom Sci 22(10):4–8CrossRef

Weisser F, Müller-Mahn D (2017) No place for the political: micro-geographies of the Paris climate conference 2015. Antipode 49(3):802–820. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12290CrossRef

Wendt A (1998) On constitution and causation in international relations. Rev Int Stud 24(Special Issue), 101–117

Williamson P (2016) Scrutinize CO₂ removal methods. Nature 530:153–155CrossRef

Winner L (1977) Autonomous technology: technics-out-of-control as a theme in political thought. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

WMO (2019) WMO statement on the state of the climate in 2018. WMO, Geneva

Wood M, Flinders M (2014) Rethinking depoliticisation: beyond the governmental. Pol Polit 42(2):151–170CrossRef

Zappettini F, Krzyzanowski M (2019) The critical juncture of Brexit in media & political discourses: from national-populist imaginary to cross-national social and political crisis. Crit Discourse Stud 16(4):381–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2019.1592767CrossRef

Zhang Y, Posch A (2014) The wickedness and complexity of decision making in geoengineering. Challenges 5:390–408. https://doi.org/10.3390/challe5020390CrossRef

Zürn M (2008) The politicization of economization? On the current relationship between politics and economics. In: Scherer AG, Palazzo G (eds) Handbook of research on global corporate citizenship. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 293–311

Zürn M (2013) Politisierung als Konzept der Internationalen Beziehungen. In: Zürn M, Ecker-Ehrhardt M (eds) Die Politisierung der Weltpolitik. Umkämpfte internationale Institutionen. Berlin, Suhrkamp, pp 7–35

Zürn M (2014) The politicization of world politics and its effects: eight propositions. Eur Polit Sci Rev 6(1):47–71. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773912000276CrossRef

Zürn M (2019) Policization compared: at national, European, and global levels. J Eur Publ Pol 26(7):977–995. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2019.1619188CrossRef

Titel: Talking Tomorrow’s Technology, Framing Political Choice?
verfasst von: Judith Kreuter
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: Climate Engineering as an Instance of Politicization
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-60339-7

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-030-60340-3

Copyright-Jahr: 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60340-3_1

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner