Grappling with a sea change: Tensions in expert imaginaries of marine carbon dioxide removal

IF 8.6 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Sara Nawaz , Javier Lezaun
{"title":"Grappling with a sea change: Tensions in expert imaginaries of marine carbon dioxide removal","authors":"Sara Nawaz ,&nbsp;Javier Lezaun","doi":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2024.102806","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>While research on marine carbon dioxide removal (mCDR) expands apace, significant unknowns persist regarding the risks and benefits of individual mCDR options. This paper analyses the assumptions and expectations that animate expert understandings of mCDR, with a focus on issues that are central to the responsible governance of this emerging field of climate action. Drawing upon interviews with experts involved in mCDR research projects both academic and entrepreneurial, we highlight four thematic tensions that orient their thinking but are often unstated or left implicit in scientific and technical assessments: (1) the relevance of ‘naturalness’ as a criterion of evaluation for mCDR approaches; (2) the perceived need to accelerate research and development activities via alternative paradigms of evidence-building; (3) a framing of mCDR as a form of waste management that will, in turn, generate new (and currently poorly understood) forms of environmental pollutants; and (4) a commitment to inclusive governance mixed with difficulty in identifying specific stakeholders or constituencies in mCDR interventions. Although expert consensus on these four issues is unlikely, we suggest ways of ensuring that consideration of these themes enriches debate on the responsible development of novel mCDR capabilities.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":328,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Change","volume":"85 ","pages":"Article 102806"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378024000104/pdfft?md5=d4bd0e3cf699ee44cca0e311f66dfb20&pid=1-s2.0-S0959378024000104-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Environmental Change","FirstCategoryId":"6","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378024000104","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While research on marine carbon dioxide removal (mCDR) expands apace, significant unknowns persist regarding the risks and benefits of individual mCDR options. This paper analyses the assumptions and expectations that animate expert understandings of mCDR, with a focus on issues that are central to the responsible governance of this emerging field of climate action. Drawing upon interviews with experts involved in mCDR research projects both academic and entrepreneurial, we highlight four thematic tensions that orient their thinking but are often unstated or left implicit in scientific and technical assessments: (1) the relevance of ‘naturalness’ as a criterion of evaluation for mCDR approaches; (2) the perceived need to accelerate research and development activities via alternative paradigms of evidence-building; (3) a framing of mCDR as a form of waste management that will, in turn, generate new (and currently poorly understood) forms of environmental pollutants; and (4) a commitment to inclusive governance mixed with difficulty in identifying specific stakeholders or constituencies in mCDR interventions. Although expert consensus on these four issues is unlikely, we suggest ways of ensuring that consideration of these themes enriches debate on the responsible development of novel mCDR capabilities.

应对巨变:专家对清除海洋二氧化碳的想象中的紧张关系
虽然有关海洋二氧化碳去除(mCDR)的研究在迅速发展,但有关单个海洋二氧化碳去除方案的风险和效益的重大未知因素依然存在。本文分析了专家们对 mCDR 理解的假设和期望,重点关注对这一新兴气候行动领域的负责任治理至关重要的问题。通过对参与学术和企业两方面的 mCDR 研究项目的专家进行访谈,我们强调了引导他们思考的四个紧张主题,但这些主题在科学和技术评估中往往没有说明或隐含在评估中:(1) 将 "自然性 "作为一种评价标准来评价 mCDR 方法的相关性;(2) 认为有必要通过替代性的证据积累范式来加速研究和开发活动;(3) 将 mCDR 定义为一种废物管理形式,反过来又会产生新的(目前还不甚了解的)环境污染物形式;(4) 在致力于包容性治理的同时,又难以确定 mCDR 干预活动中的特定利益相关者或支持者。尽管专家们不太可能就这四个问题达成共识,但我们提出了一些方法,以确保对这些主题的考虑能够丰富有关负责任地开发新型 mCDR 能力的辩论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Environmental Change
Global Environmental Change 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
18.20
自引率
2.20%
发文量
146
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Global Environmental Change is a prestigious international journal that publishes articles of high quality, both theoretically and empirically rigorous. The journal aims to contribute to the understanding of global environmental change from the perspectives of human and policy dimensions. Specifically, it considers global environmental change as the result of processes occurring at the local level, but with wide-ranging impacts on various spatial, temporal, and socio-political scales. In terms of content, the journal seeks articles with a strong social science component. This includes research that examines the societal drivers and consequences of environmental change, as well as social and policy processes that aim to address these challenges. While the journal covers a broad range of topics, including biodiversity and ecosystem services, climate, coasts, food systems, land use and land cover, oceans, urban areas, and water resources, it also welcomes contributions that investigate the drivers, consequences, and management of other areas affected by environmental change. Overall, Global Environmental Change encourages research that deepens our understanding of the complex interactions between human activities and the environment, with the goal of informing policy and decision-making.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信