title: Governing solar geoengineering research as it leaves the laboratory.
abstract: One of the greatest controversies in geoengineering policy concerns the next stages of solar radiation management research, and when and how it leaves the laboratory. Citing numerous risks and concerns, a range of prominent commentators have called for field experiments to be delayed until there is formalized research governance, such as an international agreement. As a piece of pragmatic policy analysis, this paper explores the practicalities and implications of demands for 'governance before research'. It concludes that 'governance before research' is a desirable goal, but that a delay in experimentation-a moratorium-would probably be an ineffective and counterproductive way to achieve it. Firstly, it is very unlikely that a moratorium could be imposed. Secondly, even if it were practicable it seems that a temporary ban on field experiments would have at best a mixed effect addressing the main risks and concerns, while blocking and stigmatizing safe research and delaying the development of good governance practices from learning by doing. The paper suggests a number of steps to ensure 'governance before research' that can be taken in the absence of an international agreement or national legislation, emphasizing the roles of researchers and research funders in developing and implementing good practices.
authors.affiliation: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School, 79 John F. Kennedy Street, PO Box 117, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA aparker1@gmail.com.
authors.forename: Andy
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Parker
keywords: field trials; governance; moratorium; solar geoengineering; solar radiation management