Meeting policymakers where they’re at
The International Center for Future Generations’ vision is of a world wherein technology is governed to benefit and safeguard present and future generations. The center presently addresses five disruptive technologies: advanced artificial intelligence, biotechnology, neurotechnology, quantum computing, and climate interventions.
We seek to empower policymakers to address the high stakes that come with these rapidly moving technologies – meeting them where they are at.
A listening and learning approach to cooperative development of SRM governance
Policymakers have been reluctant to address Solar Radiation Modification despite ubiquitous calls for more governance. The International Center for Future Generations (ICFG) is taking a listening and learning approach to identify no-regret governance opportunities and empower policymakers along the way.
Taking the time to better understand decision-makers' concerns and priorities has already shown to be a powerful lever for constructive work between academia and policy. It is not just what we in the SRM community think that determines the most important issues: For example, policymakers are often concerned by aspects well beyond the physical science — in the realm of politics, values and ethics, and geopolitical risks.
We’ve also found that learning flows both ways: we learn from them what their concerns and assumptions are, which enables us to better frame the information we wish to impart. At the same time, we hope policymakers learn from us about some of the key uncertainties, potential risks and benefits SRM poses — and how this relates to their policy priorities. This mutual learning helps to build trust and breaks down some of the defensive postures that inhibit the development of governance policy.
No-regret governance options: progress no matter one’s preferences toward (non-)use of climate interventions
In this manner, we have identified four potential no-regret options, which if pursued wisely would serve the scientific community, policymakers, and civil society — no matter anyone’s stance on possible future deployment of SRM. We are keen on hearing your thoughts on these as we are co-creating them with input and ideally co-ownership across those communities.
1. Transparency of research activities, funding and findings may be strengthened through a public repository of SRM research and related activities. This could enhance decision-makers' confidence and provide a basis for more systematic efforts upstream of assessments.
2. Monitoring of the atmosphere including to detect potential tests and climate system responses may involve sharing information between organisations with satellite capabilities.
3. Figuring out the conditions for responsible research and the guardrails that prevent irresponsible action. In our view deployment should not be on the table at present and research needs to be done responsibly to inform decision-makers and the public.
4. Foresight analyses can help better anticipate the many ways in which things can go wrong or right beyond our knowledge of the climate system including the complicated (geo-)political realities in which SRM will emerge. Politics will invariably shape decisions on SRM governance, perhaps more so than science – should a rogue or stunt sub-scale deployment occur in the near future. Given this, ICFG will work collaboratively with relevant experts to develop geopolitical scenarios that help ground the discussion. We’re also working with foresight practitioners, including ICFG’s foresight team, to introduce SRM onto these policy agendas.
While the seemingly technical work in those areas will not answer whether or how to deploy SRM, it will provide a much-needed space for actors to interact and build more shared understandings. ICFG thus seeks to serve as a policy incubator helping identify and specify options and breaking down the steps necessary to reach them. We seek to do this as a gradual process — first informally with key individuals, then through road-testing with those who advise them as well as with broader stakeholder groups. We aim to serve as a trusted convener, privately bringing together policymakers from various institutional entities with experts on SRM from the social and physical sciences as well as civil society, so they can ask questions, challenge assertions, and identify new realms of research that they and their peers want answers to.
