Suchergebnisse

Decisions in the context of Climate Engineering (CE), the deliberate large-scale manipulation of the Earth's climate, are decisions made under uncertainty. CE options are associated with a broad range of environmental and societal risks that raise complex questions: How can the risks be assessed and evaluated when balanced against the risks of alternative strategies to counteract climate change? What are the strategic implications for climate politics against the background of insufficient scientific knowledge? Can we estimate the ethical implications of the risks involved for society? Uncertainties and risks represent a central aspect of the issue but cannot be reduced to the traditional technical orientation of risk terminologies. The article elaborates on the specific characteristics of the risks and uncertainties associated with CE technology from six different disciplinary viewpoints. It thereby seeks to reveal chances for a mutual enrichment of these individual viewpoints since each discipline experiences boundaries while examining the complex risks of CE. In this way, the article redefines disciplinary boundaries without entirely dissolving them and without disregarding the valuable contribution every individual viewpoint can make. This aim is realized by means of the identification of new approaches to central questions regarding the risks and uncertainties involved in CE that can only be addressed from an interdisciplinary perspective.

This paper investigates households' preferences to reduce their carbon footprint (CF) measured in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e). It assumes that a substantial CF reduction of households is essential to reach the 1.5 ◦C goal under the Paris Agreement. Data was collected in four mid-size cities in France, Germany, Norway, and Sweden. Quantitative data was obtained from 308 households using a CF calculator based on a questionnaire, and a simulation game. The latter investigated households' preferences when being confronted with the objective to reduce their CF by 50 percent by 2030 in a voluntary and forced scenario. Our results show that the greater the CO2e-reduction potential of a mitigation action, the less willing a household was to implement that action. Households preferred actions with moderate lifestyle changes foremost in the food sector. Voluntarily, households reached a 25% footprint reduction by 2030. To reach a substantial reduction of 50 percent, households needed to choose actions that meant considerable lifestyle changes, mainly related to mobility. Given our results, the 1.5 ◦C goal is unlikely to be realizable currently, unless households receive major policy support. Lastly, the strikingly similar preferences of households in the four European cities investigated seem to justify strong EU and international policies.