Authoritative statements and language from recent human rights expert reports MEDIA BRIEF

The document synthesizes expert warnings that geoengineering technologies, including carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and solar radiation modification (SRM), pose unprecedented risks to human rights and may act as a 'moral hazard' by delaying the necessary phase-out of fossil fuels. It highlights that these technologies are largely unproven and unfeasible at scale, with potential for disproportionate harm to Indigenous Peoples, rural communities, and future generations. The brief advocates for a rights-based approach to climate action that prioritizes immediate emissions reductions and the application of the precautionary principle, suggesting that some high-risk activities, such as stratospheric aerosol injection, may warrant a complete ban.

• Geoengineering technologies, specifically new technologies intended for climate protection (NTCPs), are currently considered speculative and unproven, lacking viability as mitigation or adaptation measures because they are not feasible at scale and may actually increase total carbon dioxide when construction and operation emissions are included.
• A primary risk of geoengineering is the 'moral hazard,' where the promise of future technological carbon removal slows down immediate reforms to cut emissions, diverts attention from the primary goal of decarbonization, and justifies insufficient action to phase out fossil fuels.
• The deployment of geoengineering technologies would have a massive and disproportionate negative impact on vulnerable groups, particularly Indigenous Peoples, peasants, and fisherfolk, potentially leading to forced displacement and loss of traditional livelihoods.
• Human rights experts suggest that because of the lack of knowledge regarding risks, NTCPs should be presumed generally harmful to human rights. This warrants restrictive regulations, potential moratoria, or a complete ban on specific technologies like solar radiation modification (specifically stratospheric aerosol injection), which is described as 'ungovernable'.
• International frameworks, including the Maastricht Principles and the Committee on the Rights of the Child, emphasize that States have obligations to protect future generations and children by not relying on unproven future technologies and by regulating or prohibiting activities that pose substantial risks to human rights.

APA

Center for International Environmental Law (2023). Authoritative statements and language from recent human rights expert reports MEDIA BRIEF. https://www.ciel.org/news/media-brief-geoengineering-human-rights

Chicago

Center for International Environmental Law. Authoritative statements and language from recent human rights expert reports MEDIA BRIEF. 2023. https://www.ciel.org/news/media-brief-geoengineering-human-rights.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Center for International Environmental Law |title=Authoritative statements and language from recent human rights expert reports MEDIA BRIEF |date=11 September 2023 |url=https://www.ciel.org/news/media-brief-geoengineering-human-rights |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centerforinternationalenvironmentallaw2023authoritative, author = {{Center for International Environmental Law}}, title = {{Authoritative statements and language from recent human rights expert reports MEDIA BRIEF}}, institution = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2023}, month = sep, url = {https://www.ciel.org/news/media-brief-geoengineering-human-rights}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }