https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/lawreview/vol11/iss2/6/


*Authors*
Jonathan B. Wiener and Tyler Felgenhauer

*Recommended Citation: *Jonathan B. Wiener & Tyler Felgenhauer, The
Evolving International Climate Change Regime: Mitigation, Adaptation,
Reflection, 11 Tex. A&M L. Rev. 451 (2024).
Available at: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.37419/LR.V11.I2.6
Abstract

The complex international regime for climate change has evolved over the
past three decades, from the Framework Convention on Climate Change and the
Kyoto Protocol through the Paris Agreement and beyond. We assess this
evolution from the 1990s to the 2020s, and its potential future evolution
from the 2020s to the 2050s, across three main policy strategies:
mitigation, adaptation, and reflection. In its first three decades, the
regime has focused predominantly on the mitigation of net emissions and on
engaging all major emitting countries in that effort. More recently, as
progress on mitigation has been slow and as the impacts of climate change
have risen around the world, the regime has begun to address adaptation.
The next three decades may see the rise of a third strategy, reflection, if
actors (collectively or unilaterally) perceive an urgent need to alleviate
peak climate damages through fast-acting but controversial and risky
climate interventions known as sunlight reflection methods or solar
radiation modification (SRM). Several major international groups have
recently issued reports on SRM, yet the international climate change regime
has not yet constructed a governance regime for assessment or management of
SRM. We recommend and outline comprehensive risk-risk tradeoff analyses of
SRM to help avoid harmful countervailing risks. We suggest the development
of an adaptive governance regime, starting early and embracing iterative
and inclusive learning and updating over time. We urge that among the first
key steps should be the development of a transparent international
monitoring system for SRM. Such a monitoring system could provide early
warning and help deter any unilateral SRM, assess the intended and
unintended global and regional impacts of any research or eventual
deployment of SRM, foster collective deliberation and reduce the risk of
international conflict over SRM, help attribute adverse side effects of SRM
to assist those adversely affected, and aid learning to improve the system
adaptively over time. Thus, any reflection (of sunlight) should involve
ongoing reflection (analysis and revision). Such an SRM monitoring regime
is needed before SRM might be deployed, and can be developed at the same
time that the focus of current efforts remains on mitigation and adaptation.
Source: Texas A&M University

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAHJsh9-X963EXN9OwyWZnH6RrvzkkP9TK6z4HqNKCCtKLfiC3w%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to