The Pros And Cons Of Geoengineering

1689 Words7 Pages
2.3 Classification of Geoengineering Some actions which produce environmental improvements have been beneficial health effects similar to public goods. Likewise, some forms of environmental devastation resulting in ill health can be categorized as public bad, according to (Tisdell, 2009). These may well be of a local regional or global nature. For instance, a measure that reduces the populations of disease-carrying mosquito type supply local or regional public goods. It is predicted that global climate change will reduce human health, which can be regarded as a public bad. The discussions on whether or not geoengineering is a deliberate manipulation of global environmental systems is still at the embryonic stages. Some early work published by Barrett (2009) often described geoengineering as a global public good while others disagree. Gardiner (2012) challenges that classification by first pinpointing, Stratospheric Sulfate Injection (SSI), as an example of geoengineering that does not fit the official definition of a global public good. Gardiner (2012) argues that it is misleading to frame geoengineering as a public good because it fails to address the ethical concerns which are imperative when forming geoengineering policy. This paper will examine both opposing arguments to contribute to this economic analysis. Furthermore, for the purpose of this thesis, considering SSI as an exemplary geoengineering scheme will be done for this analysis. This is due to the vast number of
Open Document