Early engagement will be necessary for atmospheric methane removal field trials

Abstract

Atmospheric methane removal (AMR) refers to a suite of emerging technologies and practices that destroy atmospheric methane. There is growing interest in AMR field trials to better understand the risks and benefits of various approaches. Building on rights-based rationales from international law and core principles of environmental justice, we argue that AMR field trials should not proceed before meaningful public engagement occurs. We also draw preliminary lessons from ocean fertilization and solar radiation management cases to highlight the significance of involving members of the public in conversation about climate intervention technologies in early stages of the research and development process. While we emphasize that engagement is not a checkbox for gaining social license, these cases illustrate how neglecting public engagement can be unnecessarily detrimental to proposed research. We further point to an enhanced weathering experiment to highlight how early engagement can foster ethical processes and outcomes, which enhance alignment of research with societal values. While empirical evidence does not yet support the argument that engagement always results in the outcomes researchers desire, it does always result in justice enhancing outcomes and should therefore be pursued regardless. We advocate for diverse engagement approaches based on the nature of the technology, with a focus on collaboration with impacted communities, the public, and international interdisciplinary researchers. To ensure responsible research practices, the article calls for the development of comprehensive governance frameworks and ethical guidelines for field trials.

Keywords

• atmospheric methane removal
• stakeholder engagement
• field trials
• greenhouse gas removal