Could lessons from medical research ethics inform better conversations and governance for climate engineering research
Shaun D. Fitzgerald, Albert Van Wijngaarden, Ramit Debnath, Zoe Fritz

TL;DR
The paper explores how lessons from medical research ethics could help improve discussions and governance around climate engineering.
Contribution
It proposes applying insights from medical ethics to address challenges in climate engineering research governance.
Findings
Climate engineering discussions face significant challenges in scientific spaces.
Medical research ethics offers potential solutions like oversight mechanisms and specialized review systems.
Defining boundaries and introducing oversight could help manage climate engineering research.
Abstract
Conversations about climate engineering are difficult to have in many spaces. While public debate deserves exploration, we focus on the difficulties scientific discussions around climate engineering face. For inspiration on how to improve this contested space we turn specifically to the history of controversial medical research. Some ways to move forward might consist of establishing an oversight mechanism, defining boundaries and introducing a specialised review system.
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsClimate Change and Geoengineering · Climate Change and Health Impacts · Global Health and Surgery
