This is really fascinating. I think a pretty close analogy is international water governance. Neighboring countries share access to a river but the more upstream country can seriously damage the more downstream country with damming/water pollution. It’s a high stakes issue between neighboring countries and has led to water treaties that countries have a strong incentive to stick to because escalation would be very damaging.
Exactly. Such problems are similar in nature. But it is important to point out that in such cases bilateral or multilateral agreements can be found relatively quickly (and have been in the past—see e.g. Rhine pollution treaty), whereas geoengineering needs a global treaty which is much harder to craft.
This is really fascinating. I think a pretty close analogy is international water governance. Neighboring countries share access to a river but the more upstream country can seriously damage the more downstream country with damming/water pollution. It’s a high stakes issue between neighboring countries and has led to water treaties that countries have a strong incentive to stick to because escalation would be very damaging.
Yes, I come here to say that building dams is a type of geoengineering, but it is net positive despite occasional catastrophic failures.
Exactly. Such problems are similar in nature. But it is important to point out that in such cases bilateral or multilateral agreements can be found relatively quickly (and have been in the past—see e.g. Rhine pollution treaty), whereas geoengineering needs a global treaty which is much harder to craft.