Slippery Slope Arguments as Precautionary Arguments: A New Way of Understanding the Concern about Geoengineering Research

James Andow

Environmental Values, 2023, vol. 32, issue 6, 701-717

Abstract: It has been argued that geoengineering research should not be pursued because of a slippery slope from research to problematic deployment. These arguments have been thought weak or defective on the basis of interpretations that treat the arguments as relying on dubious premises. The paper urges a new interpretation of these arguments as precautionary arguments, i.e. as relying on a precautionary principle. This interpretation helps us better appreciate the potential normative force of the worries, their potential policy relevance, and the kind of evidence required by slippery slope arguments. Understood as precautionary arguments, it is clear that slippery slope arguments against geoengineering capture concerns that are worth taking seriously.

Keywords: Geoengineering; slippery slope argument; precautionary principle; ethics; climate change (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3197/096327123X16702350862737 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:envval:v:32:y:2023:i:6:p:701-717

DOI: 10.3197/096327123X16702350862737

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Environmental Values
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().