Skip navigation

Please find below the judging results for your proposal.

Semi-Finalist Evaluation

Judges'' comments


Judges:
I find this hard to assess. It is essentially a pitch for a certain technology, which has been subsequently partially rewritten to address some governance points - but is still, substantially, a technology pitch. I don't have a problem with an entry which seeks to address governance aspects of a certain technology - indeed, that is quite an interesting approach. But I don't think there is a coherent set of proposals here. Certainly it is very hard to understand what it is all about (too many unexplained acronyms, for a start). As far as I understand it, I'm not convinced it is geoengineering and I'm not sure the governance points are realistic - e.g. that the failure of international organisations to issue a "letter of scientific concern" would be "paramount [sic] to tacit approval". Can't see that running in a court of law, let alone with governments.

NOTE: ONE OF OUR JUDGES HAD AN ISSUE WITH THE INTERFACE AND LOST HIS ORIGINAL COMMENTS AND HAD TO RECREATE THEM AS HE WAS BEST ABLE:

.REconstructing the summary:- proposal includes some governance detail, but it's mainly an attempt to promote a specific category of projects.- Governance proposals are all intended to exploit current thin regulation of CE to promote this type of projects.- Many points of proposed governance are weak or under-specified (what's the foundation and how does it get authority/legitimacy to speak for all project proponents? How do you identify set of relevant treaties? What makes you think they will respond to inquiries on the terms you specify, and that their failure to respond as you specify fairly represents consent?- The proposal doesn't address CE broadly, and in particular excludes all the forms that are most challenging to governance.

Anita and Ben: We appreciated the effort that went into the proposal, but we agree with John and Ted's concerns, and their decision not to advance your proposal in its present form. Especially given how much work went into this proposal, we hope you'll keep advancing your ideas.

0comments
Share conversation: Share via:
No comments have been posted.