Statement from the Independent Advisory Committee to Harvard University on the Stratospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment
We, the members of the Advisory Committee to the Stratospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment (SCoPEx), commit to work with Harvard University to develop and implement a credible and sound governance framework for this research project. We are contributing to this Committee as individuals with different expertise, experiences, and perspectives, and we will remain true to our values and beliefs as we conduct this work.
As a Committee, we are united by two facts:
- Climate change an enormous and pressing challenge facing nature and humanity, and
- Reducing emissions and atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases as quickly as possible must be the highest priority to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.
We also agree that the current limited state of knowledge does not permit us to reach a conclusion on the efficacy of solar geoengineering as a climate intervention. Therefore, SCoPEx is not a valid reason for shifting the global focus away from current, better known and understood adaptation and mitigation measures, especially the reduction of emissions.
Each of us is committed to the work of this Committee because of the possibility that governments or others may turn to solar geoengineering as an option for mitigating climate change as the impacts become more severe. While the SCoPEx research team designed the experiment to answer a set of scientific and engineering questions, we recognize that this experiment has implications far beyond these questions.
Moreover, current research practices are not well adapted to the ethical, moral, or even technical issues associated with geoengineering research. The SCoPEx project presents an opportunity to pilot comprehensive and inclusive approaches to research governance that are commensurate with the myriad, interconnected, and complex challenges presented by geoengineering research. We modestly hope that the processes we develop and employ to evaluate SCoPEx can both responsibly guide this particular experiment and serve as a model for other geoengineering research. We also hope that this work will provide a foundation and test-case for broadening participation in guiding research and making sound decisions about scientific experiments.
The Committee will strive to ensure that if the SCoPEx project is undertaken, it will be done in a transparent, responsible, and legitimate manner that meaningfully contributes both to science and to building appropriate public engagement. None of us is undertaking this work with a predetermined outcome in mind. Rather, we are committed to ensuring that this experiment demonstrates core principles of transparency, legitimacy, and technical soundness.
Toward that end, our Committee will structure our work, recommendations, and engagement with Harvard leadership and the research team around four complementary elements:
- A scientific and technical review that includes atmospheric and climate-related evaluation of the experiment;
- A financial review to examine the project, the research team, and our own Committee for potential conflicts of interests;
- A review of relevant laws and regulations to ensure the experiment’s compliance at the local, regional, state, national and international levels; and
- The design of a robust public education and engagement framework to consider the experiment’s impacts and implications at scales from local to global. This design process will invite input from local communities near the launch site, people who care deeply about the project and its implications, and, to the extent feasible, people who are most vulnerable to climate change and to the effects of geoengineering.
Based on these four elements the Committee will make recommendations to the research team and Harvard leadership on the path forward for the experiment. The research team and Harvard leadership have assured the Committee that our input will be taken seriously and fully considered as part of the research process. We will recommend that the experiment will be suspended if it does not, in our collective judgment, meet our standards for rigor, transparency, safety, and inclusive engagement. The University and the research team agree that the review process is not legitimate if it doesn’t allow for the possibility of significantly modifying or even ending the experiment.
The Committee is committed to ensuring that the science is sound, all voices are heard, and there is full transparency into the SCoPEx project. This complex project will involve many areas of expertise, and when needed, the Committee will turn to outside experts for counsel. We welcome the widest international collaboration, as we seek to promote broader and genuine engagement with interested stakeholders on the findings and implications of SCoPEx.
We invite you to stay connected on Advisory Committee activities through our mailing list.