Publication | Closed Access
Does the ‘No-Harm’ Rule Have a Role in Preventing Transboundary Harm and Harm to the Global Atmospheric Commons from Geoengineering?
29
Citations
0
References
2015
Year
Climate EthicsEngineeringEnvironmental LawEnvironmental Impact AssessmentLawClimate PolicyInternational Environmental LawTechnology LawSpace LawEnvironmental LegislationEarth ScienceEnvironmental PolicyCustomary International LawClimate Change LawClimate LawEarth System GovernancePublic PolicyInternational RelationsInternational LawPublic International LawPreventing Transboundary HarmEnergy LawGlobal Atmospheric CommonsSolar Radiation ManagementInternational Institutions
Solar Radiation Management ( srm ) geoengineering poses a significant risk of transboundary and global atmospheric harm. How might international law regulate the future use of srm ? We explore how the ‘no-harm rule’ from customary international law might contribute to the international governance of future attempts at srm . The no-harm rule imposes a legal duty on states to prevent significant damage across borders and in the global commons. Existing geoengineering literature assumes that, as the international law system lacks a mandatory enforcement mechanism, the no-harm rule will play little or no role in the governance of srm . We challenge this assumption by focusing on the possibilities of compliance with the no-harm rule through bolstering its legitimacy and sense of legal obligation. We explain how Brunnée and Toope’s theory of ‘interactional international law’ might provide a useful lens for developing the no-harm rule in this way to independently respond to the risks posed by srm .