The ethics of geoengineering: Moral considerability and the convergence hypothesis

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2012

Abstract

Although it could avoid some harmful effects of climate change, sulphate aerosol geoengineering ( SAG), or injecting sulphate aerosols into the stratosphere in order to reflect incoming solar radiation, threatens substantial harm to humans and non-humans. I argue that SAG is prima facie ethically problematic from anthropocentric, animal liberationist, and biocentric perspectives. This might be taken to suggest that ethical evaluations of SAG can rely on Bryan Norton's convergence hypothesis, which predicts that anthropocentrists and non-anthropocentrists will agree to implement the same or similar environmental policies. However, there are potential scenarios in which anthropocentrists and non-anthropocentrists would seem to diverge on whether a particular SAG policy ought to be implemented. This suggests that the convergence hypothesis should not be relied on in ethical evaluation of SAG. Instead, ethicists should consider the merits and deficiencies of both non-anthropocentric perspectives and the ethical evaluations of SAG such perspectives afford. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comments

Copyright 2012 Wiley. A link to full-link has been provided for authorized subscribers.

Publication Title

Journal of Applied Philosophy

Published Citation

Svoboda, Toby. "The ethics of geoengineering: Moral considerability and the convergence hypothesis." Journal of Applied Philosophy 29.3 (2012): 243-256. 10.1111/j.1468-5930.2012.00568.x

DOI

10.1111/j.1468-5930.2012.00568.x

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS