http://editions.lib.umn.edu/mjlst/2016/04/27/solar-climate-engineering-and-intellectual-property/

Solar Climate Engineering And Intellectual Property

Posted By: mjlst April 27, 2016

Jesse L. Reynolds

Postdoctoral researcher, and Research funding coordinator, sustainability
and climate
Department of European and International Public Law, Tilburg Law School

Climate change has been the focus of much legal and policy activity in the
last year: the Paris Agreement, theUrgenda ruling in the Netherlands,
aggressive climate targets in China’s latest five year plan, the release of
the final US Clean Power Plan, and the legal challenge to it. Not
surprisingly, these each concern controlling greenhouse gas emissions, the
approach that has long dominated efforts to reduce climate change risks.

Yet last week, an alternative approach received a major—but little
noticed—boost. For the first time, a federal budget bill included an
allocation specifically for so-called “solar climate engineering.” This set
of radical proposed technologies would address climate change by reducing
the amount of incoming solar radiation. These would globally cool the
planet, counteracting global warming. For example, humans might be able to
mimic the well-known cooling caused by large volcanos via injecting a
reflective aerosol into the upper atmosphere. Research thus far – which has
been limited to modeling – indicates that solar climate engineering (SCE)
would be effective at reducing climate change, rapidly felt, reversible in
its direct climatic effects, and remarkably inexpensive. It would also pose
risks that are both environmental – such as difficult-to-predict changes to
rainfall patterns – and social – such as the potential for international
disagreement regarding its implementation.

The potential role of private actors in SCE is unclear. On the one hand,
decisions regarding whether and how to intentionally alter the planet’s
climate should be made through legitimate state-based processes. On the
other hand, the private sector has long been the site of great innovation,
which SCE technology development requires. Such private innovation is both
stimulated and governed through governmental intellectual property (IP)
policies. Notably, SCE is not a typical emerging technology and might
warrant novel IP policies. For example, some observers have argued that SCE
should be a patent-free endeavor.

In order to clarify the potential role of IP in SCE (focusing on patents,
trade secrets, and research data), Jorge Contreras of the University of
Utah, Joshua Sarnoff of DePaul University, and I wrote an article that was
recently accepted and scheduled for publication by theMinnesota Journal of
Law, Science & Technology. The article explains the need for coordinated
and open licensing and data sharing policies in the SCE technology space.

SCE research today is occurring primarily at universities and other
traditional research institutions, largely through public funding. However,
we predict that private actors are likely to play a growing role in
developing products and services to serve large scale SCE research and
implementation, most likely through public procurement arrangements. The
prospect of such future innovation should be not stifled through
restrictive IP policies. At the same time, we identify several potential
challenges for SCE technology research, development, and deployment that
are related to rights in IP and data for such technologies. Some of these
challenges have been seen in regard to other emerging technologies, such as
the risk that excessive early patenting would lead to a patent thicket with
attendant anti-commons effects. Others are more particular to SCE, such as
oft-expressed concerns that holders of valuable patents might unduly
attempt to influence public policy regarding SCE implementation.
Fortunately, a review of existing patents, policies, and practices reveals
a current opportunity that may soon be lost. There are presently only a
handful of SCE-specific patents; research is being undertaken transparently
and at traditional institutions; and SCE researchers are generally sharing
their data.

After reviewing various options and proposals, we make tentative
suggestions to manage SCE IP and data. First, an open technical framework
for SCE data sharing should be established. Second, SCE researchers and
their institutions should develop and join an IP pledge community. They
would pledge, among other things, to not assert SCE patents to block
legitimate SCE research and development activities, to share their data, to
publish in peer reviewed scientific journals, and to not retain valuable
technical information as trade secrets. Third, an international
panel—ideally with representatives from relevant national and regional
patent offices—should monitor and assess SCE patenting activity and make
policy recommendations. We believe that such policies could head off
potential problems regarding SCE IP rights and data sharing, yet could
feasibly be implemented within a relatively short time span.

Our article, “Solar Climate Engineering and Intellectual Property: Toward a
Research Commons,” is available online as a preliminary version. We welcome
comments, especially in the next couple months as we revise it for
publication later this year

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to