ABSTRACT
Beneath this structure lies another element. While the post-Copenhagen regime, in design if not in implementation, is a fully rational, paradigmatic shift from the earlier CBDR-dominated design, it is built on the assumption that nature can be engineered to suit our needs. This narrative assumption presumes that we have or will have the knowledge and technology necessary to keep global warming from reaching 2°C, even though, as yet, we have not agreed on the precise arrangements. Once those are agreed to, we can begin work on managing the temperature rise, easing it up to 1.9°C, or even up to only 1.5°C if we find reason to be more cautious. Talk of a ‘budget’, of sharing its burden among states, of periodically revising it in response to changes in atmospheric CO2 concentrations or global warming rates or experienced impacts, of using finance strategically, etc., all imply a mechanism which, although not mechanical like a solar-management mirror suspended in the sky, notionally is a lever through which we can modulate our interference with nature and thereby nature’s responses.
