Arguing about Climate Engineering: Towards a Comprehensive Ethical Analysis of an Ongoing Debate

关于气候工程的争论：对正在进行的争论进行全面的伦理分析

• 批准号: 236770841
• 负责人: Professor Dr. Gregor Betz
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: Institut für Philosophie (PHIL)
• 依托单位国家: 德国
• 项目类别: Priority Programmes
• 财政年份: 2013
• 资助国家: 德国
• 起止时间: 2012-12-31 至 2018-12-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/projekt/236770841?language=en
• 关键词: Arguing; about; Climate; Engineering; Towards

In order to characterize the current CE controversy in detail, we distinguish different aspects (or periods) of the recent ethical debate on CE: (a) exploration, (b) mapping, (c) rigid analysis. We identify the following gaps in the ethical treatment of climate engineering proposals: There exists no comprehensive and detailed ethical assessment of the ethical CE controversy which (1) contains in-depth ana-lyses of the arguments, (2) connects to empirical, scientific findings, (3) is fully aware of the differences between various CE methods proposed, and (4) systematically embeds the moral debate in the broader philosophical context. The key objectives of our projects address these gaps. Research objectives are:• Structuring the overall debate, further elaboration of already existing map of arguments, updating surveys.• Assignment of ethical arguments to specific CE methods, especially to the three technologies of the SPP’s focus (solar radiation management by aerosol injection, ocean alkalinity increase, afforestation).• Improved understanding of the interplay of dialectical relationship in between patterns of arguments, exploring the space of dialectically coherent positions.• Analysis of a selected scope of six pivotal arguments that have already been tentatively explored ("arm-the future”, "technical-fix”, "lesser evil”, “hazards”, “moral corruption”, “macro-rebound/ sustainability”).• Analysis of ethical background of ethical concepts being presupposed in single arguments.• Contextualizing arguments in different fields of practical philosophy (technology assessment, climate ethics, ethics of risk).• Assessing the dynamics of the debate, studying whether there is some kind of progress and/or convergence towards a partial consensus in the debate.• Reflecting argumentation-theoretic and discourse-ethical aspects of the controversy (e.g., the underlying rules of discourse, framing effects, or shifts in burdens of proof).• Understanding the broader societal and political debate, determining the relationship between ethical discourse and public political debates on CE.Eventually, a comprehensive and well-founded picture of the ethical CE controversy will be presented as outcome of research.

为了详细描述当前CE争议的特征，我们区分了最近CE伦理辩论的不同方面（或时期）：（a）探索，（B）映射，（c）严格分析。我们确定了气候工程提案在道德处理方面的以下差距：目前还没有对伦理CE争议进行全面和详细的伦理评估，这些评估（1）包含对论点的深入分析，（2）与实证科学发现相联系，（3）充分意识到所提出的各种CE方法之间的差异，（4）系统地将道德辩论嵌入更广泛的哲学背景中。我们项目的主要目标是解决这些差距。研究目标是：·构建整体辩论，进一步阐述现有的论点地图，更新调查。将伦理论据分配给特定的CE方法，特别是SPP关注的三项技术（通过气溶胶喷射进行太阳辐射管理、增加海洋碱度、植树造林）。·提高对论证模式之间辩证关系相互作用的理解，探索辩证连贯立场的空间。·对已经初步探讨过的六个关键论点的选定范围进行分析（“武装未来”、“技术修复”、“较小的邪恶”、“危险”、“道德腐败”、“宏观反弹/可持续性”）。伦理概念被预设在单一论证中的伦理背景分析。在实践哲学的不同领域（技术评估，气候伦理学，风险伦理学）的背景下进行论证。评估辩论的动态，研究辩论中是否有某种进展和/或朝着部分共识的方向趋同。反映争论的论证理论和话语伦理方面（例如，话语的基本规则、框架效应或举证责任的转移）。了解更广泛的社会和政治辩论，确定伦理话语和公共政治辩论之间的关系CE。最终，一个全面的和有根据的图片伦理CE争议将作为研究成果。

项目成果

Accounting for Possibilities in Decision Making

考虑决策的可能性

• DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-30549-3_6
• 发表时间: 2016
• 作者: Gregor Betz

Are climate models credible worlds? Prospects and limitations of possibilistic climate prediction

气候模型是可信的世界吗？

• DOI: 10.1007/s13194-015-0108-y
• 发表时间: 2015
• 期刊: European Journal for Philosophy of Science
• 影响因子: 1.5
• 作者: Gregor Betz

Can we have it Both Ways? On Potential Trade-Offs between Mitigation and Solar Radiation Management

我们可以两者兼得吗？

• DOI: 10.3197/096327115x14497392134847
• 发表时间: 2016
• 期刊: Environmental Values
• 影响因子: 2.2

On the Political Economy of Solar Radiation Management

• DOI: 10.3389/fenvs.2018.00043
• 发表时间: 2018-06
• 期刊: Frontiers in Environmental Science
• 影响因子: 4.6
• 作者: K. Ott

Social, Economic, and Ethical Concepts and Methods

• DOI: 10.1017/cbo9781107415416.009
• 发表时间: 2014
• 作者: C. Kolstad;Kevin Urama Las;John Broome;A. Bruvoll;Micheline Cariño Olvera;Don Fullerton;Christian Gollier;W. Hanemann;Rashid Hassan;F. Jotzo;Mizan R Khan;Lukas H. Meyer;Luis Mundaca Cas;P. Aghion;Hunt Allcott;Gregor Betz;Andrew Brennan;S. Caney;Dan Farber;Adam Jaffe;Gunnar Luderer;Axel Ockenfels;David Popp Support;Sheena Katai;Katy Maher