IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lsg/lsgwps/wp280.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Geoengineering at the ‘edge of the world’: exploring perceptions of ocean fertilization through the Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation

Author

Listed:
  • Kate Elizabeth Gannon, Mike Hulme

Abstract

This paper describes an opportunistic case study of the 2012 Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation’s ocean fertilization project. Anchored in notions of place and identity, the Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation marks a novel entry point into social research on geoengineering, which enables a more situated engagement with ocean fertilization, in keeping with geographical traditions. The paper adopts an innovative design that combines ethnography with Q-Methodology, to identify clusters of shared meaning around the way in which contestation surrounding the geoengineering ambitions of the Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation invoked different interpretations about the role and nature of ‘nature’ and human agency. This case study suggests that ‘geoengineering’ will always be performed and interpreted through contextually specific meanings and such local particularities as geography, people, practices and place. Nevertheless, interpretative resources that have been described in relation to a range of geoengineering technologies, (including solar radiation management proposals), through earlier, and less situated, social science literatures, are also traced from this place-based experience of geoengineering. Furthermore, we suggest that our Q-Methodology factors have some interpretative overlap with ideal-typical ‘worldview’ heuristics, used to describe contemporary Western cultural currents in earlier literatures. This connects ocean fertilization in Haida Gwaii with debates about other geoengineering technologies and with wider cultural meanings and literatures that consider the human relationship with nature. We suggest that the Q-factors may serve as useful mnemonics for helping to conceptualise some of the deeper contested values and assumptions that drive public contestation about geoengineering.

Suggested Citation

  • Kate Elizabeth Gannon, Mike Hulme, 2017. "Geoengineering at the ‘edge of the world’: exploring perceptions of ocean fertilization through the Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation," GRI Working Papers 280, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
  • Handle: RePEc:lsg:lsgwps:wp280
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Working-Paper-280-Gannon-Hulme.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Holly Jean Buck, 2012. "Geoengineering: Re-making Climate for Profit or Humanitarian Intervention?," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 253-270, January.
    2. Naomi Vaughan & Timothy Lenton, 2011. "A review of climate geoengineering proposals," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 745-790, December.
    3. Hulme,Mike, 2009. "Why We Disagree about Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521727327, September.
    4. Louis Guttman, 1954. "Some necessary conditions for common-factor analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 19(2), pages 149-161, June.
    5. James Ford & Will Vanderbilt & Lea Berrang-Ford, 2012. "Authorship in IPCC AR5 and its implications for content: climate change and Indigenous populations in WGII," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 113(2), pages 201-213, July.
    6. Annick Hedlund-de Witt, 2014. "Rethinking Sustainable Development: Considering How Different Worldviews Envision “Development” and “Quality of Life”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(11), pages 1-19, November.
    7. Hedlund-de Witt, Annick, 2012. "Exploring worldviews and their relationships to sustainable lifestyles: Towards a new conceptual and methodological approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 74-83.
    8. Andreas Bjurström & Merritt Polk, 2011. "Physical and economic bias in climate change research: a scientometric study of IPCC Third Assessment Report," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 108(1), pages 1-22, September.
    9. Hulme,Mike, 2009. "Why We Disagree about Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521898690, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andreas Bjurström & Merritt Polk, 2011. "Climate change and interdisciplinarity: a co-citation analysis of IPCC Third Assessment Report," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 525-550, June.
    2. Monika Berg & Rolf Lidskog, 2018. "Pathways to deliberative capacity: the role of the IPCC," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 11-24, May.
    3. Annick Hedlund-de Witt, 2014. "Rethinking Sustainable Development: Considering How Different Worldviews Envision “Development” and “Quality of Life”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(11), pages 1-19, November.
    4. Christopher L. Cummings & Sonny Rosenthal, 2018. "Climate change and technology: examining opinion formation of geoengineering," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 208-215, June.
    5. Sara Gottenhuber & Eric Mulholland, 2020. "Implementing the Sustainable Development Goals in Times of Rising Right-Wing Populism in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-14, October.
    6. Natalie Slawinski & Jonatan Pinkse & Timo Busch & Subhabrata Bobby Banerjeed, 2014. "The role of short-termism and uncertainty in organizational inaction on climate change: multilevel framework," Working Papers hal-00961226, HAL.
    7. Tammy Tabe, 2019. "Climate Change Migration and Displacement: Learning from Past Relocations in the Pacific," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-18, July.
    8. Felix J. Formanski & Marcel M. Pein & David D. Loschelder & John-Oliver Engler & Onno Husen & Johann M. Majer, 2022. "Tipping points ahead? How laypeople respond to linear versus nonlinear climate change predictions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 1-20, November.
    9. Janet Judy McIntyre‐Mills, 2013. "Anthropocentrism and Well‐being: A Way Out of the Lobster Pot?," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 136-155, March.
    10. Markus Dressel, 2022. "Models of science and society: transcending the antagonism," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, December.
    11. Sanober Naheed & Salman Shooshtarian, 2021. "A Review of Cultural Background and Thermal Perceptions in Urban Environments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-15, August.
    12. Friederike Hartz, 2024. "“We are not droids”– IPCC participants’ senses of responsibility and affective experiences across the production, assessment, communication and enactment of climate science," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(6), pages 1-21, June.
    13. Hall, C. Michael & Amelung, Bas & Cohen, Scott & Eijgelaar, Eke & Gössling, Stefan & Higham, James & Leemans, Rik & Peeters, Paul & Ram, Yael & Scott, Daniel & Aall, Carlo & Abegg, Bruno & Araña, Jorg, 2015. "No time for smokescreen skepticism: A rejoinder to Shani and Arad," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 341-347.
    14. Nancy Menning, 2018. "Narrating climate change as a rite of passage," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 343-353, March.
    15. Mercedes Bleda & Elisabeth Krull & Jonatan Pinkse & Eleni Christodoulou, 2023. "Organizational heuristics and firms' sensemaking for climate change adaptation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(8), pages 6124-6137, December.
    16. Richard Matthew, 2014. "Integrating climate change into peacebuilding," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 123(1), pages 83-93, March.
    17. Chhetri, Netra & Ghimire, Rajiv & Wagner, Melissa & Wang, Meng, 2020. "Global citizen deliberation: Case of world-wide views on climate and energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    18. Hochachka, Gail, 2021. "Integrating the four faces of climate change adaptation: Towards transformative change in Guatemalan coffee communities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    19. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2015. "An Evaluation of the Treatment of Risk and Uncertainties in the IPCC Reports on Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 701-712, April.
    20. repec:sae:envval:v:24:y:2015:i:6:p:755-776 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Robert, Christopher LeBaron & Zeckhauser, Richard Jay, 2010. "The Methodology of Positive Policy Analysis," Scholarly Articles 4450129, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:lsg:lsgwps:wp280. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: The GRI Administration (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/grlseuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.