Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Person
Browse By Room
Browse By Research Area
Browse By Session Type
Search Tips
Meeting Home Page
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Recent years have witnessed the rise of a controversial suggestion within climate-policy agendas around the globe: Geoengineering suggests to deliberately intervene in the Earth’s climate system to address global climate change. Instead of resonating as a positive vision of socio-technical innovation, however, geoengineering manifests as a daunting option of last resort—a Plan B in tackling one of the most defining challenges of our time. How can we make sense of this highly conflicting process of innovation? How does geoengineering emerge within climate-policy—despite insoluble scientific complexities and fierce political contestation?
The paper addresses these questions by tracing the “career” of geoengineering within U.S.-politics: Drawing from documentation of federal proceedings (1990–2015), it systematically follows geoengineering through congressional hearings, legislative procedures, and Executive Branch reports. This perspective suggests that the formulation as a Plan B merely marks the latest chapter in a longstanding history: Throughout its emergence, geoengineering has substantially changed its shape; it has been problematized in shifting political contexts, and devised by a diverse infrastructure of scientific experts. Neither by turning exclusively to climate-policy, nor to climate-science, this career is sufficiently accounted for. Instead, it unfolds as a function of the mutual interdependence of science and politics in addressing anthropogenic climate change.
The dynamic trajectory of this career thus challenges linear conceptualizations of the science-politics-nexus. Precisely in its dissonance as a Plan B, geoengineering unravels the diverse channels in which scientific expertise becomes politically relevant. It serves as a prism for the reciprocal and historically contingent science-politics interrelationship.