Climate Change Action and Climate Geoengineering Under Neorealism

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Provides a theoretical framework linking international relations theory (neorealism) to climate policy analysis.

🏛政策担当者:Highlights the geopolitical risks of solar radiation management and the need for international governance.

Climate change politics has been largely analyzed through the lenses of a liberal international order. This is the most favorable approach, because liberalism contains a powerful universalistic strand, defends the rights of people, and engages in multilateral negotiations and agreements, which are important to deal with a global issue that requires intra- and intergenerational solidarity. Yet despite robust scientific consensus and decades of international multilateral agreements under the United Nations, global greenhouse-gas atmospheric concentrations continue to increase, and high fossil-fuel dependence persists. One may say that without those negotiations, the situation would be worse, but humanity is increasingly distant from complying with the objective of the United Nations Framework Convention on climate change (UNFCCC). The present work addresses climate change politics under liberal and neorealist international orders and follows the Mearsheimer hypothesis of a transition from a unipolar liberal order to a bipolar neorealistic bounded orders dominated by the US and China. The effect of international orders on sustainability and, more specifically, on climate change politics is analyzed with a methodology based on three structural determinants: (1) the world evolution of climate change variables; (2) primary-energy sources and critical minerals, and (3) climate change responses—mitigation, adaptation and climate geoengineering. The distinct energy and climate policies of the US and China are discussed using these structural determinants. US climate change policy appears to be less driven by climate observation, science and the severity of harmful impacts of climate change than by the vested interests of the fossil-fuel industry. It is argued that solar radiation manipulation (SRM) is a technological fix involving negative side-effects, uncertainties, risks and geopolitical implications, while lacking an agreed international governance framework. Potential deployment is more likely under a neorealistic international order, although it adds further uncertainty and risks without solving the climate change challenge.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.3390/su18136850first seen 2026-07-27 04:54:54