Project News & Updates

Project Updates

October 2017

  • Anna-Maria Hubert presented revised version of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Genoenginering Research at CEC '17 in Berlin, Germany.
  • Anna-Maria Hubert, Miranda Böttcher, Jane Flegal, and Janos Pasztor, Climate Engineering Conference 2017 (CEC '17) Panel, Campfire Sessions on a Code of Conduct for Geoengineering Research (Berlin, Germany)

September 2017

September 2016

Geoengineering is central to scenarios that limit global warming to 2 °C — for example, by removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere or increasing the planet's albedo (see Nature 527, 436–438; 2015). However, the environmental and social implications of such technology are holding back research. Developing an international code of conduct could resolve this conundrum by ensuring that geoengineering proposals are subject to societal scrutiny and oversight.

The code would provide flexible governance for a wide range of projects, along with general principles and procedures to guide responsible research and to inform regulatory processes for technologies as they develop.

As well as encouraging early cooperation and coordination of research, equity and sustainable development in the spirit of the 2015 Paris climate agreement, the code should promote precaution, risk assessment, public participation and transparency.

August 2016

This blog post discusses recent developments in our Geoengineering Research Governance Project (GRGP), by providing an update on our GRGP Code of Conduct Workshop held at the Oxford Martin School at the University of Oxford on 21-23 June 2017.

There is a growing body of social science literature emphasizing a need for science and technological innovation to be more accountable to society and to take into account the full spectrum of uncertainties surrounding these processes. These calls are often manifested as calls for greater reflexivity, transparency and public participation in R&D. Environmental law – with its focus on the prevention of environmental harm and precaution – provides an important site for regulation and governance for many advances in science and technology. There is an obvious logic to this choice, given the countless examples of technologies that have contributed to environmental damage at various phases of their lifecycles. However, there are conceptual limits to the application of environmental law for governing upstream R&D, as environmental obligations primarily aim at preventing or minimizing actual physical harm to the environment. Precautionary risk assessment and management are examples of governance tools for asserting greater control over research and innovation processes. However, although environmental law is increasingly informed by a broader framework of sustainable development that draws upon a range of legal subject areas, an environmental framing does not directly target the social and ethical concerns that dominate the early stages of science and the development of emerging technologies.

This blog post highlights the contribution of international human rights law – in particular, the frequently overlooked ‘right to science’ – in providing a supplementary normative underpinning for the governance of sciences and emerging technologies. We begin by outlining legal sources and legal status of this right in international law. We then go on to provide a brief overview of the normative development of this right in the context of ongoing processes established under the auspices of the United Nations Human Rights Council. Finally, we point out some of the implications of the right to science in informing responsible research practices and institutional arrangements for the conduct of geoengineering research.

June 2016

Does section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protect the freedom of scientific research? Is conducting an experiment an expressive act? These are important questions as Canadians face a world increasingly dominated by rapid scientific advancement. Recently, the US Senate and the US National Academy of Sciences have each called for greater research into geoengineering (Committee on Geoengineering Climate, National Research Council, Climate Intervention: Carbon Dioxide Removal and Reliable Sequestration (Washington: 2015, The National Academies Press) at 107). Such measures are the harbingers of an age in which humans are acquiring the capability to control the Earth’s climate the way a sculptor shapes his clay. Against this backdrop, the need for governance of geoengineering research at both the international and national levels is clear. However, any state measures to restrict or regulate research in Canada must conform to the supreme law of the land. In this post, I will explore arguments for and against the protection of scientific research under the free expression guarantee contained in the Charter. While strong criticism against inclusion of research as expression exists, I ultimately conclude that the Charter likely protects freedom of scientific research within the freedom of expression guarantee.