4 October 2018 | ZEROGeoengineering.com | Abstract: Solar climate engineering is under increasing consideration as a potential means to reduce climate change risks. Its field research may generate knowledge to reduce climate risks to humans and the environment and will, at a large-enough scale, pose its own risks, some of which will be of the transboundary kind. Liability or compensation for harm is frequently referenced as a possible component of international regulation of solar climate engineering but has been insufficiently developed. This article offers an economic analysis of the possible interrelated roles of rules, liability, and compensation in the future international regulation of large-scale field research in solar climate engineering. Notably, the benefits, risks, and incentives of climate-engineering research are unlike typical high-risk activities. The analysis proposes a hypothetical international agreement that links general and procedural rules for research, an international compensation fund, and limited, indirect state liability with a duty-of-care defense.

Author: Jesse L. Reynolds, Department of European and International Public Law, Faculty of Law, and Tilburg Sustainability Center, Tilburg University

“Because large-scale field research in solar climate engineering will generate transboundary risks, there has been extensive consideration of existing and potentially new international regulatory instruments. Proposals have mostly emphasized rules, broadly defined, ranging from command-and-control to nonbinding norms. However, there are other regulatory means—such as liability—that would seek to guide behaviour in order to reduce risks. Liability provides, moreover, a basis to compensate victims for harm.”  -p184

“Just as it may be more efficient for the victims’ government to stand in their place, so too could the injurer’s government be held vicariously liable. After all, it has greater financial resources than the researchers, may be easier for victims to identify, and would be in a position to influence the researchers’ levels of activity and care through funding conditions and domestic regulation.” -p.201