Dear Friends and Colleagues Climate discourse today is rife with fears that critical thresholds and tipping points can no longer be defended, and in part as a result, media attention to high-risk interventions such as stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) has ballooned. A critical thread of the current discourse has been brewing for some time: the argument that while SAI is risky, we (the usual hypothetical global ‘we’, that is) must somehow judge its risks against the otherwise unavoidable risks of climate change.
>From one perspective, this appears a common sense position. From another, it >is an active effort to frame the debate in ways that admit only one conclusion >… In this new paper in the European Journal of Risk Regulation, I discuss the risk-risk framing, and how one might undertake meaningful and ethical risk-risk assessment of climate interventions. I hope it will be of interest to others in this group. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2025.10019 Reconstructing Risk–Risk Analysis to Support Effective Governance of High-Risk Climate Interventions | European Journal of Risk Regulation | Cambridge Core doi.org (I offer a brief discussion of the issues and implications in this linked in post https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/from-frying-pan-fire-wrestling-risks-solar-duncan-mclaren-7qcue). Best regards Duncan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "gep-ed" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gep-ed/9B880FE0-5E4E-4A25-AB98-3996034F84C0%40gmail.com.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
